Sydney Modern Gallery

Have been a Friend to the RBG and the Art gallery for 30 years.
I am no longer a Friend of the Art gallery
I think the land grab of the entry to the RBG is appalling. I agree with all Elizabeth Farrelly said in the SMH. To erect a glass box of no real value at the cost to the Botanic Gardens of their present grand but low key entry will be a terrible loss.
For the Art gallery to take away parking places in Mrs Macquarie's Road is pure stealing,when they have the whole of the Domain Car Park.
The years of disruption and destruction will be terrible for no good end. Former Art Lover , Caroline Bray

The State Library of NSW is very pleased to support the Art Gallery's plans for its proposed "Sydney Modern" extension. Quite apart from the benefits it will bring our community as a whole in the form of enhanced public access to collections which might not otherwise be enjoyed, the proposed extension will further enrich our local cultural precinct and draw an increased number of visitors to our area. The development will also create the possibility for enhanced educational programmes and other forms of cooperation bringing together the city's cultural institutions.

I thoroughly object to the use of Botanic Gardens land for building Sydney Modern.
This is extremely valuable open space which should not be used for the Art Gallery. Build this project in another area!
A number of trees will be removed and 140 of these discarded
Vehicle access to the Gardens will be compromised, as Mrs Macquarie's Road is the only easy access to the Gardens for people with mobility issues or with prams.
Public transport issues are not being addressed.
Less parking near tge Gallery.
The Wooloomooloo entrance to the Gardens will be compromised.
It is so ugly!! It will totally destroy the ambience of this peaceful green area.
Parts of the RBG will be dig up for pies and other infrastructure, and tge building disruptionnwill be horrendous!

No loss of green space is acceptable. Sydney needs all the green space that it currently has and more.

The size of the footprint. This project is loo large and ambitious and alternatives should be found such as using the "Power House Museum" site for more art exhibitions.

The visual impact on the precinct - particularly 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. 72 will be retained in their current location and 8 will be relocated. The SSDA states that 265 new trees will be planted. 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. Council has already allowed too many trees to be cut down for the new city rail network. We need to protect the trees in our city.

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 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. These building heights are not in keeping with the natural look of the area. Keep the high buildings in the city areas.

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.

Round-a-bout outside Woolloomooloo Gate. This will be unattractive and indicates even more flows of traffic to the area which is currently unspoiled. Add more public transport which feeds from a greater variety of starting points.

The significant disruption to the Garden and Domain during construction. Noise & dust from construction is already choking our city and it is one project after another, never ending. Leave the Domain area in peace! It is the one safe and peaceful place in the city to go.

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.
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 high importance to the Trust. 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.

This is a heart felt plea to keep the area as natural and unspoiled as possible. It is a sanctuary for city residents, workers and visitors to enjoy a peaceful and quiet place. Please do not reduce this green space.

Please consider using the Power House Museum site as an alternative site with shuttle buses between the two sites to enable full use of both areas.

Some time ago I received a response from Mr. Michael Brand regarding my objections to Sydney Modern - whilst it was good to receive an acknowledgement, there was little regard for some of my concerns. In the meantime, I have visited AGNSW to see a model of the proposal and read numerous online documents. My concern now specifically relates to changes that will be most evident along Mrs. Macquarie's Road - the proposed new entrance. From what I understand, this will remove a large tract of open space that currently provides a view towards Woolloomooloo framed by grass and trees. To lose precious Sydney-city open space to a building (without denigrating modern architecture in any way) is such a sadness to me that I sincerely hope a review can be undertaken. Is there some way that the proposed building footprint in this particular space can be removed or at least substantially reduced. It is noted that reference is made to "landscaping" but this seems somewhat quirky - remove grass and established trees for a building, whilst accepting the need to add some form of greenery. Re-use of the old tanks is excellent, changing the view along Mrs. Macquarie's Road is a travesty.

I'm a frequent visitor to Sydney, and have watched this project take shape over the past few years. The gallery definitely needs to be bigger, and it seems to really miss out to Melbourne on getting those big shows. I heard they can't fit in all the school kids either! The site where they are planning to build is pretty sad looking right now. This new building will be great!

I am a frequent visitor to Sydney, and always stop in at the Art Gallery of NSW. I look forward to the time that the expansion of the Gallery will enable it to achieve the WORLD CLASS STATUS it deserves.

TEC has long sought to protect valuable public open space throughout the State and within Sydney. Government policy on protection of Sydney green space is currently being significantly extended.

The Domain and its trees are one of the city's most valuable and significant areas of public open space. The Sydney Modern Project will in TEC's opinion have a major negative impact on the much valued public open space in the Domain at the entrance to the historic areas of the Royal Botanic Gardens and Mrs Macquarie's Point.

We have reviewed the GML Heritage Impact assessment in the EIS and fundamentally disagree with the conclusion that the negative impact is only minor or moderate. We consider that the review in the Grounds of Objection formulated by Andrews and others which have been submitted to the Department provide a convincing rebuttal of the heritage impact assessment and urge the rejection of the proposal for an expansion at this particular location.

7 trees (6 Forest Red Gum and a Port Jackson Fig) of high retention value will be removed. They range in height from 12metres to 14 metres. They have broad canopies and because of their prominent position near the top of the ridge are visual statements in the landscape. All are healthy and in very good condition, with an estimate of more than 40 years growth in current position.

91 trees of moderate value are to be removed. They range in height from 25 - 5 m and include most of the Australian native canopy trees of Eucalyptus sp (5sp), rainforest (3sp) and coastal forest (2sp). Many have safe useful life expectancy values of more than 40 years. These trees are considered to be in good health and condition and make a fair contribution to the amenity of the site and surrounding properties.

A further eight (8) trees, including three (3) of high retention value (Mediterranean Fan Palm, Moreton Bay Fig, Canary Island Palm) and five (5) of moderate retention value (Cabbage Tree Palm) and (Moreton Bay Fig)] are proposed to be relocated (transplanted) elsewhere within the site per Landscape Plans prepared by McGregor Coxall. The transplantation of these trees is considered to be horticulturally feasible but transplanting mature trees of heights from 15-9m is not guaranteed.

Replacement trees are unacceptable and will not replicate in any sensible timefarme the amenity, urban heat abatement and wildlife values to be lost.

The claim that lost open space will be replaced by 'built open space' is laughable.

There is obvious potential for expansion with far less heritage impact both in other locations in the Domain and elsewhere in the city and metropolitan area.

As a former trustee of the Art Gallery of NSW I am acutely aware of the limitations of the current building. While it has served the community and visitors well over many decades it is not fit for purpose in the 21st century, nor is it in keeping with Sydney's status as a global city. Previous administrations have found creative ways to use every possible space, but even so it greatly limits the exhibitions which can be staged, relegates much of the iconic Aboriginal art which is a key attraction, (especially for overseas visitors and tourists) to a bottom floor gallery, and much of the time -- especially with school visits, scheduled activities, events and openings -- is uncomfortably crowded.
The understated, elegant and highly functional design of Sydney Modern extension will address these limitations and incidentally optimise the use of land which is otherwise unsuitable and rarely, if ever, used for public purposes. It will enable the Gallery to bring out and exhibit works which are of necessity held in storage in Lilyfield because of the lack of space in the current building. Importantly it will become a pre-eminent attraction for overseas as well as interstate visitors and will be able to claim its place as one of the great art museum buildings of the world. For those of us who have been privileged to be associated with the Gallery, but therefore most aware of its limitations, this is a long-awaited and inspiring development.

Green space is requured for a healthy lifestyle.

My concern is the loss of a valuable green space in the heart of Sydney. Whilst I support the concept of additional gallery space let it not be at the expense of green space.

I fully support the extension of the AGNSW (Sydney Modern). We need a bigger and better art gallery (or may I say MUSEUM) here in Sydney. When visitors from all around the world come and visit Australia, they almost always visit Sydney. We have to offer these visitors an adequate museum. In comparison to other states we have been fallen behind. with the creation of Sydney Modern Sydney will catch up with Melbourne and Brisbane.

Green open space in Sydney CBD is at a premium and not something that can be created unlike increasing a building size (buildings can be extended by going underground, or raised). Being both an art and garden lover I feel it is more appropriate to expand the art gallery into another location beyond Sydney CBD where greater numbers of people can access eg Parramatta - Sydney's second CBD.

The size of the proposed new building and its location (and the fact that the land belongs to the gardens not the gallery) is not appropriate. An alternative would be to create a building similar to MONA in Tasmania where gardens remain and gallery space is below. Oh, that's right, the government took land from the gardens in 1950's for the eastern distributor making this option not that easy now.

It is time as a community we started to value and conserve our open spaces and stop over developing and cutting down our trees all in the name of progress.

This is a brilliant addition to Sydney.. It is an elegant and respectful design . I also der stand there will be a number of new galleries which is fabulous. I cannot wait to see the oil tanks

* I oppose the plan to extend the Art Gallery of New South Wales across a section of the Domain.

Re: Green Space.
* Large cities must have central green spaces that are large enough to support large numbers of visitors without losing their core characteristics.
* Tourism brings prosperity to some sections of the community and it enables some facilities to be built which the local community alone would not be able to support. However, tourism should not reduce the quality of life of the people that live or work in a city. Tourism should not be on a scale that reduces the unique characteristics of a city. Once a city matches the others, tourists lose interest.
* The Domain and the RBG are unique green spaces being located adjacent to one of the most beautiful harbours in the world. People from all walks of life are able to enjoy the harbour from the park in a way that is not possible or they could not afford from a built environment.
* Green space is used by a more diverse group than those who attend gallery exhibitions. NSW has a responsibility to meet their needs too.
* SSDA / Environmental Impact Study claims:
"The expansion is consistent with the principal objects of the RBGT ...... and encourage use and enjoyment of the Trust lands by the public by promoting and increasing the educational, historical, cultural and recreational value of those lands."
Decreasing the size of the green space available does not increase its values. Moreover, the Domain is one of the few open spaces available for non-structured activities and should not have educational, historical, cultural and recreation activities imposed upon it. We need open spaces for people to use their imagination, improvisation and initiative in recreation.
* The proposed site contains a small area of bushland. This is rare to find close to the city. It must be retained and allowed to flourish naturally with the minimum of tracks passing through it. It is the only opportunity that many inner Sydney dwellers have to discover the beauty of the bush. For local involvement in this area a bush regeneration group could maintain it. One might already be doing this as it is almost weed free.
* Green space in a city should be increased not shrunken as the population increases. It should not be given up except in a national emergency. This is not a national emergency.

Re: Proposed Solutions
* One does not need a harbour view to enjoy good art. People come to see the collection. The money would be better spent on quality art. The NGA took a brave step and bought Blue Poles. This not only attracted more visiters but gave the gallery credibility and provenance status for when it wants to borrow major works from overseas galleries.
* The proposed plan not only robs the citizens of green space, it detracts from a beautiful building. As it stands the AGNSW, especially the entrance side, is a beautiful building complimented by uncluttered green space. This draws many visitors to the Gallery.
* The AGNSW says that it has not enough space or appropriate space for modern and contemporary art. The solution is to specialise. The obvious place for contemporary art would seem to be the Museum of Contemporary Art in an excellent, accessible location on the western side of Circular Quay, within walking distance from the AGNSW. One wonders why the duplication. Surely this can be resolved.
* The project has been called Sydney Modern, which brings to mind Tate Modern. Why not follow the example of the Tate Gallery and find a new and more relevant site for modern art? When an additional building was previously suggested, the SSDA claimed that this would incur additional administration and running costs. Why not present it as a job creating scheme? Furthermore, if it is located away from the Cultural Ribbon it would involve Sydney people from other areas and attract more tourists to the chosen area.
* If the Gallery chose which type of art it wants to specialise in, and divested itself of the rest to other museums, it would have the expertise to choose and the budget to afford to buy or borrow outstanding works from the chosen era. These would be great drawcards.
* In calculating the numbers of visits per year the visitors to the separate museum that is created as a result of specialising would also be taken into consideration. Therefore AGNSW would retain or increase its history of high visiter numbers.
* The AGNSW claims that the additional space should link with the Opera House and Library, the Cultural Ribbon. Linking with these other institutions is important when planning programs, but they do not need to be physically close. There is no justification. They should not duplicate something nearby which is already happening with the Museum of Contemporary Art.
* In conclusion, I do not agree that the RBG or the Domain should be reduced in size.
I do not agree that increasing the size of the AGNSW is in the best interest of art in NSW.

1. The loss of green space would be deplorable. The area from the present Gallery to the end of the peninsula is a haven for residents and particularly visitors. To intrude on an ambiance that would be lost forever would be a tragedy. The green space often alluded to as being little used is (a) much used at certain times and (b) only a fraction of the total site.

2. The green space regarded as little used (oil tank roof) may not be full of people all day and every day but such park areas are precious as open space, not only for humans. Parks are not intended to be full of people at all times.

3. To lose trees in this parkland area is unacceptable. The 'replacements' to be planted cannot compensate for the visual impact on the whole experience of going, by whatever means of transport, to Mrs Macquarie's Chair. The peninsula is a major attraction of Sydney for tourists and I implore that it should remain more than a minor adjunct to citification; it is a unique and priceless asset.

4. The proposed roundabout opposite the Woolloomooloo Gate to the Botanic Gardens would irrevocably change the non-city vista and so would be increased traffic flow.

5. As the drawings stand at present, the experience of viewing the new buildings from Mrs Macquaries Road would be appalling, a smack in the face, a harsh reality of over-development. Far from being a world-class attraction it would be a world-class catastrophe to swap what we have now with this brutalist construction. The present plan, despite the esteem of the architects, has little exterior merit.

6. As Mrs Macquaries Road is the sole means of approach for all but pedestrians, there is a major risk that some of the Domain would later be carved off for a road. That would be another tragedy, to citify a green space and create air and noise pollution.

The Botanic Gardens has already lost significant land when the expressway was built. I object to losing ANY more green space from the city centre. Traffic around the Domain is already very congested. A larger gallery can only make it worse. More evening events will add to the city rush hour congestion. I would prefer the AGNSW to spend their money acquiring more ancient masters or ancient sculptures, rather than exhibit the very modern works and photographs that I think should be at MOCA.
We are told Western Sydney needs more culture. Why not build a second AGNSW in Parramatta and leave the AGNSW alone?

I have read the proposal and am impressed by the promise of an exciting and timely major addition to what is already a major but overstretched feature in Sydney's cultural life. Sydney suffers badly in any comparison with the facitilities of the State Art Galleries in Canberra, Melbourne and Brisbane.

I am disturbed that some environmental organisations, including one I belong to, are protesting. The sensitivity to environmental issues shown in the proposal is very carefully worked out. The "land bridge" at present is pretty dull, uninviting and not utilised. The proposal calls for careful re-vegetation and enhancement of passive use, with a passageway from the Domain through to Woolloomooloo. I found it inspirational and it is to be applauded.

The claim for "compensation" by the Botannical Gardens is very strange. Most would be surprised that the land is even "owned" by the Gardens. They have done little with it. The proposal is for a different public use of public land, and as, in my view, the proposed use is exciting and very beneficial to the public, it should be supported. One public institution should not have to compensate another for a change of public use of a public asset.

I object strongly to the use of existing green space currently part of the RBGS. The continuing pressure to whittle away this precious land for the use of any structure must be avoided in the interests of our future. Instead of increasing the footprint of the AGNSW into the Trust land consider please putting it where the NSW government would like more cultural infrastructure - i.e. in the Western Suburbs.

Sydney is lagging behind other state galleries in Australia and needs to be brought up to international standards.

I support the Sydney Modern Project. It is an inspiring design by a brilliant architect, which will become a local and international drawcard.

I believe it is really important for the Gallery to expand with an outstanding architectural statement that will house contemporary art and also create a new landscape connection to the gardens and the domain.

Sydney needs this.