Sydney Modern Gallery

I support the expansion of the Art Gallery of NSW, the Sydney Modern Project, due to the economic and cultural benefits it will provide Sydney. Such an iconic and quality Australian institution deserves to be showcased to the world, and this project is an essential step.

Very excited by Sydney Modern. Having grown up in the Western Suburbs of Sydney the Art Gallery of NSW was my city home. More space for art is fantastic.

Having just read the book by Judith White -"Culture Shock",
I conclude that the new Sydney Modern Gallery could be situated
in a more appropriate position so as not interfere with the Botanic Gardens or affect the aspect of AGNSW. Western Sydney would be the better solution if its huge cost is in fact warranted.

I was until recently a member of the Art Gallery Society for 36 years.

Objection to Sydney Modern: State Significant Project DA SSD 6471

This is a flawed project. The Art gallery of NSW (AGNSW) as an important cultural institution must set an example in sympathetic and sustainable design practice. This Proposal is not supported as it: alienates public open space; is architecturally unresolved and over scaled; and incorrectly assumes that the public open space of the Outer Domain CAN be built upon, being replaced by a building unsympathetic in its detail.

It is questioned whether this project can indeed be described as an `addition' as it visually dominates AGNSW, the eastern sections of the Outer Domain and the eastern entry of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Sydney (RBG&D).

The following negative environmental impacts are identified:

1_Loss of Publicly Accessible Open Space

The Proposal demonstrates a loss of public open space which as a `green volume' within the Outer Domain, has cultural significance.

The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) claims the Proposal will encourage use and enjoyment of the area by promoting and increasing the educational, historical, cultural and recreational value of the area. With the loss of tree cover and a reduction in the extent of public open space, we cannot see how this claim can be supported. Besides with new `trafficable landscape roofs' of the gallery `addition' will, however, become merely privatised being accessed only when the gallery is open.

With the removal of significant trees, relocation of a significant Canary Island Date Palm and net loss of open space this is not balanced by new open space in the Proposal. The Proposal also incorporates an increase in the extent of new pavement.

The Proposal assumes, incorrectly, that as the site is largely disturbed, it can then be built upon. This reverse logic and acceptance of building upon a `disturbed' and publicly assessed landscape, cannot be supported.

2_Adverse Heritage Impacts

The Proposal dismisses the cultural and historic value of the RBG&D and the AGNSW by assuming tree removal, locates built form immediately adjacent to the alignment of the Art Gallery Road, interrupts significant view lines and builds over the landscape of the Outer Domain.

The Entry Plaza of the Proposal ignores the historic importance and alignments of the eastern entry to the RBG&D and the façade and portico alignment of the AGNSW. The positioning the Proposal immediately adjacent to the path line of Art gallery Road and its visual impact upon the historic and open setting of these items of state significance cannot be supported.

The view from the Woolloomooloo Gate within the RBG&D east towards Potts Point and south-west to the AGNSW has been compromised and consequently the Proposal will have an immense visual impact within the Outer Domain.

The Proposal will have cumulative adverse impact on the setting of the entries to the RBG+D and AGNSW. The importance of the AGNSW entry and the eastern entry to the RBG&D should predominate, however, the Proposal seeks to dominate this setting with an over scaled `pergola' and walled elements which relegates the Vernon building as 'secondary'. By placing the new `flexible entry plaza' and pergola entry so far west and forward of the original entry to the AGNSW shifts the hierarchy of entry to the AGNSW as well as impacts the Woolloomooloo Gate to the RBG&D.

3_Insensitive Architectural Design

The design, including the adjustments made since the competition, still places undue impact on a landscape of cultural importance. It is questioned how the Proposal, described as `visually lightweight', can achieve its `visual lightness' especially when, as a gallery and repository for a national collection, requires environmentally controlled gallery spaces with closed in walls and controlled lighting.

The Proposal is described as `sitting lightly' within its broader setting, however, the angled forms of oversized `pavilions' will substantially increase the amount of solid walled elements in an area once containing an open woodland. The proposal can never be consistent with the Competition Jury comments. The Proposal is NOT a series of visually `light weight' pavilions `stepping down the hill'. The resultant architectural form is of solid blocks when seen from the north and east and these visually compete with the local and distant views of the RBG&D and AGNSW.

The EIS cites that the height of the Proposal are in alignment with the AGNSW, however, there are no architectural elevations or architectural sections (which can be found to a scale) which verify this claim. There is a small image (of the west elevation) within the Landscape Report and this is hardly examinable. The EIS however, contains multiple visualisations (mainly from the air) and when the 'flexible entry plaza' (with pergola) is shown, it appears as a background element. There are no visualisations confirming the view impacts from Woolloomooloo Gate. Consequently, we question the omission of such crucial information.

Conclusion

This Proposal is of an over scaled `addition' which has adverse heritage impacts upon its cultural landscape. This is indeed a flawed modern project and cannot be supported.

Glenn Harper

As long time members of the Foundation and Friends of the Sydney Royal Botanic Garden and in my case a Volunteer Guide, we strongly oppose this proposed development.
The loss of open space and resulting congestion of traffic and pedestrians will be a major problem in the future given projected increases in population.
The disruption to visitors to the Royal Botanic Garden during the prolonged construction period is unacceptable.

Michael and Lola Barrett

The Sydney Modern project is misplaced, both institutionally and geographically.

Sydney already has a first class `modern gallery' in the Museum of Contemporary Art (MCA). It is that institution that should have made this application if Sydney needed an additional modern gallery.

The construction of the Sydney Modern is sited on the land of its neighbour, the Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain. As such, this represents a 'land grab' and a conversion of scarce essential green space the city needs more than a second 'modern' gallery.

The historic, symbolic and unique green space site of the RBG must be protected from intrusion or appropriation, whether from the Conservatorium of Music some years ago or by AG-NSW now.

When `theft' is an essential ingredient of expansion, then expansion is not essential.

If The Sydney Modern must be built it must not deduct from the available, scarce inner-city green space. Building the Sydney Modern over the Domain Parking Station and a work-week lunch time football field is a far better option.

The Sydney Modern can be positioned anywhere in Sydney without impacting on its operations. The Sydney Modern will attract a different audience than the traditional AG-NSW and there is no compelling reason for them to be con-joined.

I strongly object to the proposed siting of the Sydney Modern on RBG land. As well, its construction poses a huge inconvenience on operations of and visitation to the Gardens. It is likely Mrs Macquarie's Road will be severely impacted, causing a loss of an important revenue stream for the RGB from parking meters.

The proposed impact on the tree-scape is significant with over 100 significant, mature trees to be removed and a built structure put in their place - this is not an equal exchange. These trees cannot be replaced, even if other trees are planted elsewhere. It will take 20 to 40 years for the replacement trees to mature.

Sincerely
Barry Leithhead

I generally support the Sydney Modern application (SSD6471), however believe it would be substantially improved from the perspective of residents in Lincoln Crescent and Woolloomooloo generally, with the following modifications and/or amendments.

There is insufficient consideration being given to the sitelines from Lincoln Crescent when viewing the development above the existing fuel bunker retaining wall. The view from the street level will be oppressive with the lower pavilion appearing to run very close to the boundary, above the concrete fuel retaining wall. There will be a loss of trees and vegetation which would otherwise mitigate the built environment. In particular we have asked at information sessions if the concrete retaining walls, which are very unattractive, could be the subject of vertical garden schemes which would bring much needed greenery to the street, which is also to lose some trees along its length and in the median strip. It seems laughable that we are told the applicant cannot touch the concrete steps as they have heritage value, when the much more valuable fuel bunker itself is do be part demolished and given to adaptive reuse (with which I agree).

Secondly, traffic while measured at modest daily movements, can be very difficult to battle when turning into Cowper Wharf Road and thereafter into Lincoln Crescent, at particular times and traffic lights seem to be poorly synchronised. This will need further attention both during construction and at full operation of the Sydney Modern. It may be necessary to govern use of the new loading dock to ensure traffic movements of residents and guests are not impeded unduly by Sydney Modern's operations. A further consideration of a new ferry service to Woolloomooloo Bay would be a very attractive option for the Sydney Modern and it may be private corporations are interested in establishing same (eg NRMA's recent purchase of Manly Fast Ferry Service).

Thirdly, the Ausgrid power station appears to be headed for de-commissioning in 2019 or so we are told... is there any additional plan to incorporate this area which is an eyesore and will severely detract from the Sydney Modern architectural excellence, particularly from the eastern facade.

Finally, the eastern facade in general is the poor cousin in the planning arrangements with substantial negative impact across all aspects of the project - vegetation, building height and a resulting canyon-like effect for Lincoln Crescent which is presently a pleasant, sunny and well treed street. All of these attributes are to disappear under the scheme, and I request that additional efforts be made to improve, predominantly with vegetation, particularly over the concrete stepped bunker wall, the overall amenity of this facade. It is clear that there is an intention for pedestrian traffic from the east across to the Sydney Modern site and every effort should be made to improve the visual amenity from this perspective (and also to support Lincoln Crescent residents manage the access to existing public pathways and the building's lift which will be utilised as well as the new lift proposed). I also seek confirmation that the sea water cooling system will not be noisy when pumps are operating, and the system is not visible in the water of Woolloomooloo Bay.

The proposal is marvellous by very well respected architects, it is beautiful and will energise the location.
This is a well overdue extension to this much marvellous much loved institution, of world standard.
The gallery has a substation collection which belongs to the people and this provides the opportunity for us to see more of the collection.
I whole hearted support what is proposed, Sydney needs this to happen.

As the leader of the private philanthropic capital campaign to support this project, I wanted to lend my voice of support for this iconic cultural building that will create a new platform to inspire the subsequent generations and be a huge boost for Sydney and NSW. It will be an incredible destination, and the vision of the project has to date inspired major philanthropists to commit $90,000,000 to aid in its realisation. I believe this is a visionary moment for Sydney, NSW and its inspired government. I trust and hope that the plans will be approved and that we will be able to honour those pledges and gifts and convert this unprecedented philanthropic generosity into a wonderful public asset for the future. Sincerely, John Richardson

I am in favour of this development as it is much needed cultural infrastructure for Sydney.

I object to the proposal to build the 'Sydney Modern' (SM) on public open space grounds and diminish the Botanic Gardens facilities.
The SM could be built in a different part of Sydney e.g. Barangaroo.
If the SM goes ahead on this site then a number of changes should be made to the current plan:
1. the amount of open space taken for recreation purposes be replaced e.g. a playing field on the top of the building
2. the building be integrated into its environment to blend in with the Botanic Gardens
3. The building be set back from the perimeter of the boundary so that appropriate trees and foliage can be planted to soften the facade and prevent a 'canyon' being created in Lincoln Crescent.
4. Ensure the sea water cooling system does not environmentally degrade Woolloomooloo Bay water, beach and walls.
5 Ensure ease of access of cars into and out of Lincoln Crescent by not placing a pedestrian crossing at the junction with Cowper Wharf Road.
6. Ensure adequate disability access without the use of the Wharf Terraces Lift.
7. Provide increased public transport to prevent the public seeking parking in Lincoln Crescent
8 Limit the size and hours of operation of trucks using Lincoln Crescent

I support the Sydney Modern Project as a global city deserves a global gallery. There is so much art that just idly sits in storage rather than being shared with Sydneysiders and tourists. I am a big fan of the SANAA design which so beautifully utilises the site. A global city like Sydney needs a global art museum located in the city, so I am very supportive of the new building's location. Make this long-overdue project happen!

I have no objection to an extension to the AGNSW, however I have a huge objection to the proposed design. My reasons for this objection are: Removing the very established and architecturally relevant entrance to be replaced by the new glass boxes that have no sympathy to the existing building. I also believe the proposed design is not of any significant or outstanding design but rather a few glass boxes the will be dated by the time they are finished being built. Surely we can do much better and build an addition that is a significant and extraordinary design and compliments the current historical building. Noted art galleries around the world are of great and individual design, surely we don't have to repeat the same boring addition that was made to the MCA. Four hundred and fifty million dollars can be better spent on something that will of lasting and monumental importance.

National Parks Association of NSW (NPA) is a not-for-profit organisation committed to the preservation and enhancement of the national parks and protected areas of the State. it has maintained a concern for urban protected lands and natural heritage together with its engagement with the national park estate of NSW. In that capacity, NPA shares the serious concerns being expressed by objectors to the expansion of the Art Gallery of NSW into the public open space of the Sydney Domain which is a protected area and listed on the NSW Heritage Register to protect among other things its natural landscape. The proposed expansion will be onto public open space reclaimed over the expressway to the north of the Gallery and onto the public open space which defines the entrances to both the Royal Botanic Gardens and Mrs Macquarie's Point. NPA has reviewed the heritage impact assessment, in particular paragraph 6.2.5 and does not agree with the conclusions that the negative impact on the natural heritage values of this part of the Domain are merely 'minor' or 'moderate'. We consider the impact will be unacceptable and that the building of the project at this particular location on extremely valuable public landscape land should not be approved.

I support the project. However, I would like to see a focus and respect for diversity and access in the thinking behind how the building develops and is operated into the future. The Sydney Modern project should be a reflection & representation of the diversity of Australia, NSW and Sydney and be a showcase for First Nations people and the unique blend of multiculturalism which is the lifeblood of this city. Looking back and shaping the future. At the end, I would like to see a focus for the project on programs which enable art & culture to be enjoyed by all members of the community.

I believe the new gallery should be located to the south of the existing gallery and intergrated with a new rail stop between Martin Place and KingsCross which will improve access to the gallery for all who live in Sydney

I support the proposed Art Gallery of New South Wales expansion - Sydney Modern Project - with the following conditions:

1. New dedicated Gallery railway station between Kings Cross and Martin Place on the Eastern Railway Line at joining Domain car-parking (the new station would be a little longer than Museum and St James) ;

2. Dedicated Gallery station to have a sheltered travelator / escalator link to the Gallery to

a.) encourage and facilitate access from the Sydney CBD / City and from adjoining tourist accommodation and cruise ships;
b.) help reduce demand for car access and car parking on Art Gallery Road which is very limited; and
c.) sheltered access from the Domain Car Park, integrated with the new station access.

3. Covered connection from the existing Gallery of NSW to the new Sydney Modern Project with clear (glass) side;

4. Covering of the new Sydney Modern to be related to the light grey of the existing Gallery of NSW.

Jonathan Falk
Town Planner, Fellow of Planning Institute Australia (PIA), member of the PIA Transport Network. (PIA has made a separate submission on the Sydney Modern project)

Sydney Modern is inappropriate on the proposed site of Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust land and I strongly object to its being built there.

This is valuable green space in a city seriously lacking in sufficient for its needs with an increasing population density. Any loss is unacceptable and the NSW Government should make every effort to ensure protection of what is here.

No consideration appears to have been given to the historical and heritage values of the area.

Destruction of mature trees deprives the public of valuable shade in recreation areas. New plantings take decades to develop sufficient canopy to replace that loss.

Sydney already has a first class Museum of Contemporary Art.
A more suitable location for Sydney Modern would be in the Western Sydney area for the benefit of that large and increasing population.

The proposed construction would cause severe disruption to vehicular and pedestrian access to the Gardens and Mrs Macquaries Point, drawcards for visitors and tourists.

Loss of parking meters would cause considerable loss to the Gardens of a valuable source of revenue at a time of reducing Government funding. A one off compensation payment could in no way alleviate that loss.

Sincerely
Robin McIntyre

The Sydney Modern project will provide much needed additional gallery and exhibition space for the Art Gallery NSW. A city the size of Sydney badly needs these additional exhibitions spaces and a vital expanded Art Gallery of NSW.
This expansion will allow more opportunity for curators to develop exhibitions work from the vast AGNSW collection (which is mostly in storage), and to exhibit the work of living mid-career Australian and international artists to audiences. This has not been possible due to the limited amount of exhibition space in the existing building. At Artspace,we look forward to collaborating with the AGNSW curators and staff to develop projects which may span between our project spaces in the Gunnery Building in Wolloomooloo and the varied spaces in new Sydney Modern building and across the revitalised Art Gallery NSW campus.

I am very excited about the development of Sydney Modern and it's positive impact on the cultural landscape of NSW and Australia more broadly.
I am wholly supportive of this development and feel grateful to live in a city where the arts are supported in such a significant way.