Sydney Modern Gallery

The proposal does not justify the resumption of land from the Botanic Gardens when it would appear that there is no integration to the existing gallery, so the effect is a stand-alone gallery with a separate entrance that could be built anywhere.
I object to the erection of a public building without adequate public transport or private parking.
What other sites were considered? What about the flood plain at Parramatta, rather than moving the Powerhouse Museum there to provide culture to the western suburbs?
There appears to be little purpose-built exhibition space, rather you are proposing large halls suitable for conferences, etc for which you demolished and rebuilt the conference centre at Darling Harbour. If it is for exhibitions, why does it have to be above ground?

As an active volunteer with the Foundation and Friends of the Botanic Gardens I wish to make a submission in OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED SSDA TO EXPAND THE NSW ART GALLERY.
It proposes an outrageous land grab of precious Domain land that belongs to the people of NSW. The Minister Gabriel Upton might regard it as only "open space" but open space on the edge of Australia's largest city should remain just that. Every week day this space is enjoyed by visitors and workers as well as locals to sit in the sun, enjoy the trees, birds and fresh air away from the bussle of the city.
If the Art Gallery needs to expand then build on your own footprint.
There should be no loss of open green space
There should be no visual impact and no lost of vistas down Mrs Macquaries Road from Wooloomoloo Gates

There should be no loss of trees or relocation.

There should be no disruption to the Garden and Domain during construction.
Proposed Loss of parking spaces outside the Gallery (owned and controlled by the Trust) will not only be negative to the patrons of the AG but impact on the much needed revenue of the Trust.

No public transport study has been provided
The Botanic Gardens and Domain provides a space for the people of Sydney and visitors from all over Australia and the World. Maybe patronage at the Art Gallery is dwindling. Work harder the provide what people want

It sure isn't dwindling at the Botanic Gardens and Domain because of the amazing program the Foundation and Friends has to educate, and entertain thousands of school children each week. Not to mention the plant festivals, arts and crafts exhibitions plant displays as well as the exciting new gardens and exhibits in our well cared world famous Botanic Garden.

I strongly object to this proposed development. Sydney needs more accessible green space not less. The Botanic Gardens are an absolute treasure to people who live in Sydney and surrounds and also to tourists. There are so many trees etc. that will be destroyed, many of them years old and this should not happen for so called 'progress'. Please leave the Gardens as they are so they can be enjoyed as is for many generations to come. Why would anyone want to destroy such an iconic part of Sydney is beyond comprehension.

I object to the Art Gallery of NSW plans for expansion
The loss of any green space in this area in particular is irreplaceable.
I don't see the need for any expansion of the gallery especially for a Modern Gallery when there is already an existing publicly funded Modem Gallery.
The permanent collection could be more frequently changed and perhaps more often lent to regional galleries.

I object to the proposal to build on public open space adjacent to NSWAG.
The Royal Botanic Gardens and the associated land in the area including The Domain, are prized assets not only of significance to Sydney and the state of NSW but are also of national significance.
I visit the area with my family at least 12 x per year, even tho it is an hour to get there from the southern suburbs. For visitors to Sydney it is an extremely important part of the tourist experience. Already the Mrs Maquarie Chair area is closed to the public in the summer months to make way for opera and cinema. Please don't take any more of our treasured public open space!
If the need to expand AGNSW is so intense, please add more stories to the existing building.

I totally object to the location and positioning of Sydney Modern Project and its takeover of RBG and Domain Trust land for the following reasons:
*The size of the footprint - landgrab! Approx 8,000 sq m
*The visual impact on the precinct - loss of a sense of entry to the Botanic gardens prcecinct and particularly the effect on the vistas down from Art Gallery Road, Mrs Macquarie's Road and from Woolloomooloo Gate.
Tree removals, plantings and relocations - There are 220 trees in the development footprint. 140 will be discarded including 71 trees of high to medium value. 72 will be retained in their current location and 8 will be relocated. While the SSDA states that 265 new trees will be planted we lose all the height of 20 years of growth of the current trees . Of concern is the a large number of the trees that will be removed opposite Woolloomooloo Gates on Mrs Macquaries Road to make room for the Pavilion.
*The effect of building heights and the proximity of these buildings to the road. The building on the Land Bridge (Entrance Plaza) and the adjoining building to the north opposite Woolloomooloo Gate (Entrance Pavilion) have a setback of respectively only 5.75m and 9.95m from the road. The Entrance Pavilion fronts Mrs Macquaries Road and has a height of between 7m and 8m above the road.
*Seawater Heat Exchange System - would require easements that will affect current planting from the pipe trenches.
*Round-a-bout outside Woolloomooloo Gate with service entry opposite. Both the building of the roundabout and its effect on traffic will negatively impact RBG.
*The significant disruption to the Garden and Domain during construction. Blocking such a narrow road will affect all RBG movement and parking.
*Loss of parking spaces outside the Gallery (owned and controlled by the Trust) - not only less parking for visitors to the Garden but a significant revenue loss to Trust when Government funding for the Trust's operations is reducing.
The plan seeks to transfer ownership and / or control of a very significant part of that road to the Art Gallery.
*No public transport requirement study or plan.
Mrs Macquaries Road / Art Gallery Road provide the only vehicular access to Royal Botanic Garden Sydney and a large part of the Domain and as such, are of essential importance to the Trust.
*loss of cultural heritage. The heritage impact plan identifies adverse physical and visual impacts from net loss of open space resulting from the construction of the proposed building to the north of the existing gallery but glosses over it as moderate..
*little to no information given as to reasons for this location compared to SE corner of the Art Gallery.

This is the biggest attack on the Botanic Gardens and Domain since the Eastern Distributor cut RBG in half. We should be cherishing and valuing our green 'lungs' of Sydney, not significantly reducing our tree cover.

I write to support the Sydney Modern project.

I have followed this project since it was announced as I believe an extension of the AGNSW in the 21sr century will make a great contribution to our cultural landscape.

The need for space suited to major exhibition is well documented as is a focus on the art of the first Australians.

The siting I believe is well chosen, making the most of a very ordinary site. The building cascades down the slope and sits below the existing tree line. It's simple clean lines will sit well along the slope.

I am pleased it will not impact the Botanical gardens which I also enjoy, and I am pleased so much endemic planting will add to the amenity of the whole area.

As for what happens inside the building there appear many flexible spaces that curators and artists can work with into the future, as well as all the necessary functions of a contemporary public building.

As an active participant of the visual arts in Sydney I think Sydney Modern presents a clear plan for an exciting new public building for our city.

Christopher Hodges

1. I object to the loss of open, green space in such a significant area of the City of Sydney. Increasing population density in our city requires extended areas of open space, not a reduction. The proposed area occupied by the cascading buildings is a significant loss.

2. The State Library, Art Gallery, and the Woolloomooloo Gate entrance to the Botanic Gardens are enhanced by the open space and trees that surround them. The Entrance Pavilion to the Art Gallery Extension, 7-8 metres in height, opposite the Woolloomooloo Gate would detract from all the three structures.

3. The proposal does not occupy an under utilised area as has been stated. The proposed use of the tunnels (which does not seem to be explained fully) is a convenient justification for the plan. Such valuable and historic open space should not be seen as an opportunity for acquisition and development.

4. The proposal reduces even further the total area of the Botanic Gardens that has already suffered significant reduction, including its separation from the Domain by the Cahill Expressway.

5. I have been unable to find a plan for public transport. How will the many proposed visitors to the new site be transported without severe disruption to other sites?

In summary, I strongly object to the proposal that is to the detriment of the site and which would discourage both local and International visitors.

I cannot imagine that any other major city would sacrifice such valuable open space in this manner.

I think the proposal is a worthwhile and necessary development of the Art Gallery. I am a long-standing member of the Botanic Gardens Friends and Foundation but do not support their opposition to this project.

As a member of both The Art Gallery Society and a Friend of the Botanic Gardens, I understand the requirements of both but of paramount importance to me is the retention of public land. Therefore I wish to record my strong objection to the AGNSW expanding onto existing public land.

I wish to object to the proposed development. Sydney Modern, extension to the Art Gallery of NSW.

The Botanic Gardens is owned by all of Sydney and is therefore not to be given away in portions of land for developments.
This area of Sydney is one of the most densely populated in the city. Green space is invaluable and needed. When it is taken away it can never be put back!

Apart from the confusion and disruption to Art Gallery Road access to the Gallery and the Gardens will be severely challenged resulting in loss of income and visitors to both regions.

As for the oil tank fields! This green space is used each and every day by many people and should remain as it presently exists.

On a personal note,as a resident of Lincoln Crescent I have grave concerns. The street is narrow . Residents car park is located at the end of cul de sac. Large trucks,apart from the disruption to our normal peaceful neighbourhood,would have no turning space. I believe that the Art Gallery should look at the establishment of Tate Modern in London where expansion of a Gallery was very successfully located as an adjunct to the Tate.

I would strongly recommend that a) reconsideration be given and b) transparency to the public be made available. Sadly this is not the case today.

I object to any land being alienated from theBotanical Gardens which must be preserved in its entirety as green space in a large city

I object and in the strongest possible terms to any further alienation of the domain parklands . The architects drawing shows an enormous increase of the footprint of the Art Gallery. I accept further space for the gallery may be required but there are many other options. The use of the tanks is imaginative. But what about he large areas of Marrickville underused industrial land already used by the artistic community. What is the obsession in NSW to seek off all public land and squeeze cultural buildings onto rare and precious publis space.
Yours sincerely Pamela macdonald mb bs dep environment studies Macquarie Universty

To take public land away from the Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust should never have been considered. Sydney requires more, not less, public land for recreation as the population and number of apartment dwellers increases.
A major rethink is required; shifting the annexe to the west would be greatly beneficial to the huge population in that area, and a far more acceptable solution.

I strongly support the Friends of the Botanic Gardens Board in their opposition to this project. I am wholeheartedly opposed to the unacceptable loss of green space. The Government has stated that increasing green space is crucial in building a more sustainable Sydney.

I object to the size of the footprint.

I also object to the visual impact on the precinct particularly the vistas down from Art Gallery Road, Mrs Macquarie's Road and from Woolloomooloo Gate.

I am vehemently opposed to the removal of trees. The Government has already removed the grand trees of Anzac Parade Kensington and to justify such vandalism by replanting is to fail to respect our green environment. In Japan, for example, trees are revered.

I am gravely concerned about the building heights and the proximity of these buildings to the road.

I object to the roundabout outside Woolloomooloo Gate.

I am concerned about the Seawater Heat Exchange System which would require easements and subsequent impact on Royal Botanic Gardens Trust land.

I acknowledge the desire of the AGNSW to expand but such expansion is not the Sydney Modern Project. Far superior options include the proposal by former Government Architect, Andrew Andersons, to use the void on Barangaroo headland.

In summary, my overriding objection is to the location and design, its negative impact on and inconsistency with, the heritage, natural and public open space values of the Domain, the surrounds of the grand and historic Art Gallery and the entrances to the Royal Botanic Gardens and Mrs Macquarie's Point with their defining stands of trees and public views over the adjacent Domain lands to the Harbour beyond. This loss of public amenity is unnecessary: the cultural objectives can be equally if not better achieved in other places and in different ways.

Eastwood Evening Garden Club has approx. 100 members and at a recent meeting it was decided to unanimously vote against the destruction of so many trees and the loss of so much open space. This can never be replaced and at a time when the government is so concerned with global warming, the only way to combat this is to protect our green areas and there are plenty of other places where the Art Gallery can go without adding to our increasing "cement city".

This development shows a lack of sensitivity to the RBG , green space and transport chaos already apparent in this poorly planned city. Comparing Sydney to other State capitals and European cities we lack green space, parks and recreational space. Sydney is cluttered and unplanned. It now appears that the State Government want to further this situation in a grab for status and in a competition to out -shine Melbourne. A rather pathetic situation. Sydney could have been an outstanding city visually however it continues to be degraded by politicians with large egos.

I strongly object to the planned extension of the Art Gallery of NSW (Sydney Modern) in view to the terrible and extensive loss of valuable mature trees.

The Botanic Gardens and the Domain represent one of the very few and - in comparison to other large cities of the world - already small green spaces in the entire city area. The trees which will get removed for the extension also represent an iconic stand of trees which is of utmost importance to the appearance of the whole street and surrounding landscape.

Especially in the last 5-10 years the loss of mature trees throughout the city has been massive and was mostly driven by reckless development. This trend has to stop now!

I urge the decisionmakers most passionately to demand and deliver an alternative design for any extensions of the Art Gallery which can certainly be achieved without sacrificing these trees. In fact, the whole ensemble would only win from maintaining the tree street frontage without distracting from the cultural value of the project in the slightest. The current approach is of very disappointijg aestethic value itself anted also not integrated into its surrounds in the slightest.

Future generations will look upon you to deliver this project in a much more sophisticated manner!


Yours sincerely

As a frequent art gallery visitor, and as a lifelong resident of Sydney, I am astonished taking more public land for even something as important as an art gallery. Why not put it on the northern side, to reduce city traffic, give easier access to different people. Or South, or West. Art is importyant to all people, and people will travel to see it. I would go to Parramatta or Blacktown or Northbridge to see fine art, anywhere. But this precious public land can never be replaced, it belongs to the people. God help us, Allianz Stadium trying hard to take over Moore Park, part of Centennial Park. Please think more laterally.

The plan involves too great a loss of green space and removal of trees; the gradual erosion of open space in our city is deplorable. When consideration is being given to increasing cultural amenities in the west, why destroy part of our open space amenity in the city.
There is a lack of coherence in the design and it does not relate well to the existing building to is heritage values.
The need for such an extensive new building in the city has not been made in a convincing manner.