State Significant Development
Trinity Grammar School Redevelopment
Inner West
Current Status: Determination
Interact with the stages for their names
- SEARs
- Prepare EIS
- Exhibition
- Collate Submissions
- Response to Submissions
- Assessment
- Recommendation
- Determination
New teaching and educational facilities including a new five storey building and pavilion, improved pedestrian movement and the refurbishment of existing school building facilities and basement car park.
Consolidated Consent
Modifications
Archive
Notice of Exhibition (2)
Request for SEARs (1)
SEARs (1)
EIS (39)
Response to Submissions (36)
Additional Information (34)
Recommendation (2)
Determination (8)
Approved Documents
Management Plans and Strategies (25)
Community Consultative Committees and Panels (1)
Reports (1)
Other Documents (6)
Note: Only documents approved by the Department after November 2019 will be published above. Any documents approved before this time can be viewed on the Applicant's website.
Complaints
Want to lodge a compliance complaint about this project?
Make a ComplaintEnforcements
There are no enforcements for this project.
Inspections
16/06/2022
Note: Only enforcements and inspections undertaken by the Department from March 2020 will be shown above.
Submissions
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Message
Don Smith
Object
Don Smith
Message
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Message
With every proposal over the last 20 years, they promise so many things. Access to pools for the community, asking students not to park in various streets, school monitoring of traffic are a few examples. None of them happen, or if they do, they only last 6 months.
Then there are the restrictions imposed by courts. A 1500 student enrolment limit, lights off in buildings at night which would shine into neighbours, requirement to advertise on site parking for every event. None of these court imposed restrictions have been honoured.
The enrolment limit has been ignored, with Trinity’s proposal not hiding the fact that they are close to 1700 enrolments. There is nothing to police these infringements. We residents don’t want to have to keep monitoring them, and they are clearly not capable of controlling themselves.
PLEASE don’t approve this mess. Every time Trinity builds something, our streets are clogged with semi trailers, our houses covered in dust, the traffic becomes even more dangerous than the current dangerous mess each morning and afternoon where belligerent parents ignore the road rules.
And PLEASE don’t approve this with more restrictions that will be ignored by Trinity.
They are not a school which needs help, or more facilities. They are a very lucrative business that seems to manage to get government funds where local schools, hospitals and community clubs are shut out.
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Message
Trinity Grammar want to spend $125 MILLION on new facilities at a school which already have more impressive facilities than 99% of all schools in the country.
A high proportion of this will come from government grants, and from tax deductible donations. Taxes that would have been collected and spent on public schools and hospitals that cater for many more people.
All this is to accommodate what would be 1500 already over privileged boys.
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Message
Whilst there is good access to public transport and lots of dedicated school buses (which also contribute to the congestion) there is already an excessive amount of car transport to and from the school. Increasing the size of the car park will only encourage more parents to drive their children to the school and necessitate more school buses. I don’t believe it would significantly reduce the existing congestion in the neighbouring streets at current student levels let alone if student numbers increase. I think it is totally unacceptable to increase student numbers by a further 575 students and that this will significantly increase the congestion and associated risks and inconvenience.I feel that I am risking my car and my health every time I have to reverse out my driveway at school pickup or drop off times or on a Saturday let alone worrying about whether I am going to be late for work or not.
In addition residents in Victoria St will be inconvenienced for several years with construction deliveries for such a big project.
In summary I feel this development will significant reduce the quality of life and local amnesty for residents.
Lee Greenaway
Object
Lee Greenaway
Message
We object to a further development of this site and we object to a growth in student numbers. It is already an extremely well-resourced school and has expanded its building program considerably over the past several years. Local residents should not have to suffer any further loss of amenity because of the expansionist plans of this school that does not even cater for local students.
Department of Transport
Comment
Department of Transport
Message
Attachments
John Bowdler
Object
John Bowdler
Message
We live on the corner of Henson and Seaview Streets, only a block away from the School. Our objection is based on the proposal’s adverse impact on amenity in our residential area, specifically through:
1. An Increase in student numbers and related scale of development
2. The resulting addition to the volume of road traffic
3. Risks in management of the construction phases
First we wish to record the difficulty that we face in interpreting the vast documentation involved in the proposal. There is no overview as it pertains to neighborhood impacts. Rather we face large and impenetrable documentation; preliminary papers then a 137 page EIS with some 36 detailed Appendices. We feel limited in our capacity to respond to such a complex proposal from a large and well-resourced institution.
1. Student Numbers and the Scale of Development
Coming so soon after the recent developments around 2014-15, this latest proposal raises questions as to the School’s long-term strategy and what further proposals may follow this one in a few years’ time. Trinity has been an established educational institution in the area for many years, but our impression is that the School is now more focused on growing as a business, seeking to squeeze all the through-put it can out of a constrained Summer Hill Campus, with secondary regard at best for the implications of its location in a long-settled residential area with many conservation controls.
When we first purchased our property in the area in mid-2007 we understood the School to have a student enrolment of around 1500 students. We are now seeing our third proposal for further development of the School, this latest involving a move to a student ‘cap’ of 2100, an increase of some 40 per cent in less than 20 years –and related staffing increases.
The proposed increase in the student cap to 2100 students and 321 FTE staff is a key part of the proposal, yet receives scant analysis (page 8 of the Scoping Report and page 47 of the EIS). Simply drawing on (unelaborated) projections of growth in student demand in the ‘inner west’ and then choosing 400 (27 per cent) out of the projected total increase of 1500 for non-government schools gives no detail of the underlying rationale for expansion.
There is no examination of the School’s specific enrolment pattern, for example the number of students from outside the inner west. It falls to Appendix 10 on Transport and Accessibility Assessment to indicate that over 20 per cent of current students live 10 kilometres or more from the School. Virtually all of these would be outside the inner west. Continuation of this pattern would see over 100 extra students coming from outside the inner west and travelling long distances to the School. Alternatively is Trinity foreshadowing a change in enrolment policy that would see it only catering for students living in the inner west?
We are concerned that the growth in numbers is masked by the physical aspects of the redevelopment proposals. Our firm view is that the School must establish its case for an increase in enrolments, plus the resulting extra staff. This should be a fundamental element in determining the proposal. Against the current level of justification, we do not consider that any case has been provided for an increase in student numbers.
2. Traffic Impacts
Already our streets are extremely busy Monday to Friday – particularly mornings between 7.30am to 9am, and to a lesser extent afternoons from 3pm to 4pm. As well as Trinity, near-by Summer Hill Public School has a substantial enrolment which generates extensive parental traffic in school mornings and afternoons.
Prospect Road, Junction Road, Seaview Street and Henson Street are also important ‘through streets’ for motorists seeking to move into, out of or through Summer Hill and Ashfield. There are many vehicles parked in these streets that restrict visibility and road space. Vehicles have to enter or leave the area by accessing the arterial Old Canterbury Road, sometimes making risky turns or entering suburban streets at excessive speed.
In this environment we have real concerns for the safety of students going to and from schools, other pedestrians, and cyclists. Parked vehicles are also at risk, as we have experienced ourselves with one of our cars suffering expensive damage by an unknown driver.
Despite its bulk, we do not find the analysis contained in Appendix 10 to be reassuring. The proposed increase in student and staff numbers at Trinity can only add to traffic flows in the surrounding streets. Appendix 10 indicates that another 231 (232?) trips will be generated daily in peak times by additional students and staff. Yet the study of intersections with Old Canterbury Road shows that some turning movements are already taking excessive time, and extra trips will only add to the pressure. It is no comfort to have the analyst’s assessment that, effectively, things will not get ‘worse’ from these extra trips, particularly for those most risky right-hand turns that are already on the lowest standard (level F) of service. [We also query the narrowness of the peak periods used in the analysis eg for the Henson Street- Old Canterbury Road intersection that we observe daily.]
It is surprising that Appendix 10 makes no reference to the parking controls placed in 2019 on the southern side of Old Canterbury Road between Constitution Avenue and Hurlstone Avenue. Kerbside parking is prohibited between on school days between 8.00-9.30am and 2.30-4.00pm. These restrictions were apparently designed to improve traffic flows along Old Canterbury Road where vehicles are turning right into Henson Street and Hurlstone Avenue. Inner West Council has advised that these parking restrictions were introduced by the State Government. Appendix 10’s analysis of right-hand turn movements from Old Canterbury Road into Henson and Hurlstone in February 2020 suggests that these changes have not had much if any impact, and implies that exiting and entering Summer Hill will only grow as a traffic problem.
Moreover, such restrictions do nothing to address issues ‘in suburb’. We note that there has been no examination in Appendix 10 of the intersection of Seaview and Henson Streets, an intersection that in peak periods can be extremely busy. Vehicles wishing to turn right into Henson Street can wait some time before being able to do so safely, and be able to join the queue of vehicles wanting to turn left or right from Henson into Old Canterbury Road.
The assessment in Appendix 10 also does not allow for further increase in traffic from other sources, likely numerous in nature and difficult to control. For example, it is not yet clear to what extent there will be an increase in traffic movements through Ashfield and Summer Hill due to ‘rat-running’ between WestConnex and southern routes. On the other hand, retaining the current cap on student numbers at Trinity and so working to contain growth in traffic flows is clearly within the gift of planning authorities.
Appendix 10 and the EIS go on to propose that a Green Transport Plan be pursued to encourage students and staff to use active and sustainable transport modes to get to and from the School. The proposal is laudable, but heroic in the extent of the targeted 10 percentage point shift in behavior over a 10 year period. Conveniently, the shift between current and target numbers is precisely the same as the projected increase in student and staff numbers – 445 students and 45 staff. If such a large change in behavior cannot be achieved, what is the come-back on the School? The provision of only 37 spaces for bicycle parking hardly is a sign of confidence in the potential success of the Green Transport Plan.
Finally, we cannot accept Appendix 10’s rebuttal of the currently applicable Ashfield Council parking requirements which would require 411 parking spaces compared to the 324 proposed. An increase of only 12 spaces for some 490 extra students and staff does not make sense, and nowhere in the documents could we find an assessment that current parking provision is excessive. Combined with the heroic assumptions relating to green transport, the likelihood is that there will be much more demand for parking in surrounding streets.
3. Management of the Construction Phase
We acknowledge the provision in Appendices 10 and 18 for measures to address the impact from construction vehicles on local streets and residents. However we remain extremely wary about the commitment of the School and its contractors to put these measures into practice, based on our most recent experience of the swimming pool works at Trinity.
These works proved to be an unmitigated disaster for residents, with many truck movements in our streets. The block in Seaview Street between Henson Street and Prospect Road, our immediate area, was heavily impacted by large trucks queuing in the street for access to the site. This affected the safe and timely movement of vehicles in Seaview Street, and constrained parking opportunities. There were some harsh words between residents and drivers.
There appeared no plan by the contractors or Trinity to address such impacts. We and other residents had no option but to complain to the School. The process was unsatisfactory. It should never have fallen on householders to have to do this, rather a firm and monitored plan should have been in place to avoid trucks needing to ‘hold’ in narrow suburban streets and minimise heavy vehicle movements overall.
We consider it important that any endorsement of Trinity’s proposal include a requirement that detailed monitoring arrangements are put in place for all construction-phase traffic, with related financial penalties for compliance breaches.
John and Patricia Bowdler
2 June 2020
ROADS AND MARITIME SERVICES DIVISION
Comment
ROADS AND MARITIME SERVICES DIVISION
Message
Attachments
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Message
2) The photos in the application, being of a limited format, do not convey any of the current residential amenity or natural and built heritage of the surroundings beyond the school perimeter. The pictures taken in the Victoria Square and Seaview St locations are particularly poor in this regard. This deficiency may lead an observer to conclude that the development on Seaview St will have limited impact. The destruction of the current school owned period residences on Seaview St and their replacement with what could be interpreted as a large "modern" anonymous waste transfer facility will be a serious degradation of the vicinity. The wide nature strip will have to bear a commercial grade driveway. The photos should better illustrate the impact. The plan overall appears to attempt to keep the bulk of the development along the centre spine thus limiting the impact at the site perimeter. The proposed development at Seaview St appears contemptuous of the natural and built heritage loss it will cause.
Rod Oates
Object
Rod Oates
Message
The proposed development indicates a 400 increase in student numbers. This alone will increase vehicle numbers along Harland St to be unacceptable and unless the school can develop an appropriate traffic plan acceptable to us we strongly oppose the proposed redevelopment.
Dean Foley
Object
Dean Foley
Message
- Substantial increase in traffic flows to surrounding residential streets including Prospect Rd, Seaview St, Rosemount Ave, Victoria Sq, Victoria St, Clissold St and Hurlstone Ave.
- Overdevelopment and overpopulation of the Trinity Grammar site which is wholly surrounded by residential areas
- Reduction of open space and green space in an area with very little green space (Ashfield/Summer Hill areas).
- Safety concerns for residents of aged care facilities including Baptist Homes, Clissold St and Cardinal Freeman Village, Seaview St.
- Increased noise from traffic, school events and school population
- Parking congestion for residents and ratepayers
jo Lewthwaite
Object
jo Lewthwaite
Message
Traffic noise, road safety and congestion in the streets surrounding Trinity Grammar is already an existing concern. An increase in student numbers can only add to the current negative impacts for local residents.
Congestion, traffic noise and road safety:
With Victoria Street a 'dead end' road, Service Avenue is already a major 'rat run' for drivers wishing to access Old Canterbury Road (or other streets) via Hanks Street. Service Ave during school days and across morning and afternoon pick up/drop off times, changes from being a quiet, low traffic residential street to periods of hosting an almost continuous line of noisy, fast moving vehicles driven both by adults coming from or going to Trinity, or school student drivers and passengers (obvious by uniforms), as well as Trinity Grammar buses. Apart from the congestion, the fast speed at which these vehicles are driven down Service Ave has caused me to feel concern for the safety of humans and animals alike.
Road damage as a result of excessive traffic:
Due to the topography and underlying geology in Service Avenue, this street is already prone to road surface problems (waterlogged clay expansions and contractions resulting in cracks and bumpy surface irregularities), the road surface is made considerably worse by the existing overly-heavy traffic flow in Service Avenue. For example where the road rises towards Hanks Street, there is continual need for surface repairs as the asphalt becomes churned up and pot holes with lose stones, develop. This is an ongoing issue for all road users which will only become worse if traffic flows increase further (as they will do, if Trinity is allowed to expand its student numbers).
Removal of trees:
The mature row of trees in Seaview Street provide not only shade and green beauty for all in the neighbourhood, but extensive habitat for birds and wildlife. Clearly they have been growing in situ for multiple decades – it would be a massive shame and have substantial visual impact, as well as on birds and wildlife, to remove ANY of these enormous, healthy and beautiful trees – there are none like this anywhere in the vicinity. My same argument applies to the removal of another 26 trees – please give us the joy of keeping our environment GREEN at this time of climate change impacts and over development of sites.
Attachments
Ashleigh O'Halloran
Object
Ashleigh O'Halloran
Message
We are increasingly unable to find parking in our own streets, with both teachers and students parking their vehicles in the surrounding streets, leaving residents to often park blocks away from their own homes. The school has done nothing to monitor or manage this.
Furthermore, we fear the construction implications, such as dust, construction vehicles and continued works over the next 5 years will not only impact our quality of life, but also have potential detrimental effects on the health and safety of residents, as we do not believe the school will adequately manage any construction works, given their lack of good management in the past.
We as residents strongly object to any further increase to the school, and believe the Land and Environment Court determination in 2015 should continue to be upheld.
James O'Halloran
Object
James O'Halloran
Message
I am concerned about the lack of parking in the are already, with myself and my family frequently being unable to find parking, and often having to park blocks from our own homes. I am also concerned about the lack of any traffic management by the school at present levels, let alone with a 600 student increase. During school drop off and pick up, the traffic is horrendous, often backing up as far as the Ashfield police station and in streets in all directions, with parents and students attempting to drop off or pick up. To think there'd be an increase in this is unimaginable.
More so, the construction impacts such as dust, construction vehicles and continued works over the next 5 years will not only impact our quality of life, but also have potential detrimental effects on the health and safety of residents, and I don't believe the school will manage this adequately.
We as residents strongly object to any further increase to the school, and believe the Land and Environment Court determination in 2015 should continue to be upheld and this proposal promptly denied.
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Message
It appears that there are some 87 fewer car park spaces than mandated, with the only response being an ‘encouragement’ for staff and students to walk, cycle or use public transport. The area is poorly served by public transport, proven by the numerous bus routes the school runs already, cycling has been traditionally BANNED for students and there are only some 6 cycle spots available to store a cycle.
The streets are gridlocked during the start and end of the school day, Saturday sport and special events. Their traffic survey ignores Victoria Street, Harland Avenue and the gridlock that occurs every school day. Traffic tails backs of over 2 blocks are common and residents are forced to change their travel times to avoid huge delays. Add to that the aggressive driving of frustrated trinity parents and it is only when, not if a fatality occurs. They intend to add hundreds of students, and heighten risk of injury or worse. This shows an arrogance of breathtaking proportions.
The main car park has zero ventilation, despite staff protesting at being forced to load / unload students’ into cars In stifling conditions smelling of car exhaust. The track record of caring for people has no moral coin.
The proposal shows and exit to Harland Avenue, which is laughable. This tiny narrow street is already gridlocked every single school day by parents trying to leave the area. The school has repeatedly refused to consider transport hubs remote from the school to bus in students.
As an ex staff member, I know that students are barely able to move from class to class, due to the crowded conditions. No amount of replacement buildings will help this. They need a new site away from summer hill with more room.
The school has already demonstrated its incompetence in managing and bringing about major projects: the Founders Building contained flaws which saw storm water and sewerage leaks into the basement. The new junior school building smell of sewer waste due to poor drainage and waste removal construction. It literally stinks after heavy rains.
The centenary centres as an examination hall that is huge, but fails to provide any toilets! The row of portaloos installed every examination period is laughable, If it were not tragic for parents paying thousands in fees. It is such a farce, that formal examinations for lower high school years have been abandoned!
Personally, I have witnessed:
Staff are Often required to often drive to other locations, including the Strathfield campus; sometimes required to do up to 4 transfers a week! The school has no regard for the community and refuses to engage in the way state schools do, by opening their grounds to public use during school holidays.
Bicycles were banned and there is little to no scope for secure storage of a bicycle.
Trinity does not monitor students parking on the street, despite this practice being banned for students.
Is zero consideration of neighbours ’ driveways, amenity to their own homes or peace of mind, with all starting times close together, despite it being easily possible to Stagger starting times.
The school runs sporting activities daily from 5am through to 7pm, creating street parking issues and stress for the neighbourhood.
With The litany of past failures, it is hard to imagine this proposal can be completed, let alone that it is well thought out.
Please reject this overdevelopment outright, and ban any more increase in student numbers, which have been repeatedly increased despite promises to not do so for decades.
Barbara Matchett
Object
Barbara Matchett
Message
Attachments
Mary Foley
Object
Mary Foley
Message
I am also concerned regarding the period of construction with large trucks coming and going and also with the associated noise, dust and dirt
Jeffrey Matchett
Object
Jeffrey Matchett
Message
Attachments
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Message
I also strongly object to the removal of 26 trees from this site and 2 trees in Seaview Ave. This street has a leafy landscape and the removal of trees will have a negative impact. This plan is contrary to the local and state urban canopy policy.
In regards to the removal of 4 houses, these are federation houses / apartments in keeping with the style of the local area adjacent to significant heritage listed houses.
Seaview st is a very busy road, and the addition of a delivery dock will further burden the road traffic on this small suburban street.
The construction of a 5 story building, is not in keeping with height of thr local heritage area, and I request the need for such large building be reconsidered.
It was only a few years ago, that major completed at this site. Local residents have seen to benefit from the construction of a 50m Olympic pool as promised.
There are 2 public boys high schools within 1km distance of this school and there is no reason for further expansion of the facilities to be undertaken.
I attach and example of the daily congestion of Victoria road, Ashfield as an example if the impact the school has on the local area.
Kind regards
Tara