University of Sydney - Chau Chak Wing Museum

I have been a member of the University of Sydney community for five years, potentially for another four, as a student and am currently a casual member of academic staff in the Sydney Medical School. As someone who has a deep attachment to the university, I feel very strongly about this and must make clear that I am comprehensively in opposition to the proposal. The siting is entirely inappropriate and it risks harming the heritage of the listed-Main Quadrangle, arguably the most significant grouping of gothic buildings in Australia today. Placing an eye-catching building in front of the Quadrangle is clearly unconscionable.

The strength of the University's Main Quadrangle lies in the integrity of its vistas to the city across Victoria Park, and reciprocally the views from the city towards the university. This principle has been central to the university's design philosophy since its establishment at the current site in the 1800's, and has been protected since.

The university has already taken steps to ruin its campus' heritage, spoiling the Madsen and Agriculture Buildings most recently with its construction of F23 Administration and FASS buildings respectively, though I regrettably did not speak out then. I feel most strongly and fervently that the Main Quadrangle's front lawns and vistas are crucial to be preserved. Cambridge for instance, would never dare try to place a competing building in front of King's College Chapel.

I have no urgent opposition or reservations about the design of the building itself, my criticism lies only with its siting. The currently standing tennis courts are far less visually intrusive. As a member of the university community, I strongly urge that the applicants reconsider and abandon their plans for any buildings on this current sensitive site.

The destruction of two historic museums to get the public out of the way

The University of Sydney's quadrangle sits on one of the only great, planned axes in Sydney, with a view across Victoria Park to the City of Sydney itself. It's cultural importance is huge and any proposal to disrupt the space should be subject to an extremely high standard of scrutiny. I do not doubt the need for a new museum, however, placing it where it is, in the blocky and rather unimaginative form proposed not only puts a large new freestanding building on one of the only pieces of European style landscaping left in the University, but interrupts the view from the quadrangle back to the city skyline and vice versa. As such, in placing the new museum in such a prominent and disruptive position, it seems to have become a vanity project for the project's proponents in the high administration rather than a project that seeks to resolve the collection management problems of the University's museums. I note that my concerns are generally supported in the minutes of the Heritage Council.

Roads and Maritime reviewed the submitted application and raises no objection to the Chau Chak Wing Museum development application at University of Sydney.

Please refer to letter in attached PDF.

Please find attached a submission from the Sydney and Northern NSW Branch of the Australian Garden History Society.

Refer attachment.

Refer attachment.

Refer attachment.

Refer attachment.

Refer attachment.

This is like building a Bunnings in front of the Harbour Bridge and Opera House. The site including the Sydney University Great Hall and Victoria Park are recognised as having significant heritage value. To place a "floating box" (as described by the media Architecture and Design) in this historically significant vista is terrible.

This University has a long history of these types of actions. It is another example of the University's disregard for its own heritage. Worse than in 1970 its acquisition of the home of its benefactor Thomas Fisher after which it was demolished despite the University's 1965 Development Strategy stating it would consider heritage value of buildings including making specific note of Mr Fisher's home.

The presentations of the Visual Impact Assessment and the Heritage Assessments are poorly prepared white wash documents. The photo montages presented are clearly based on photos taken at foot level and not human eye level. There are no photos taken that highlight the uninterrupted vista from the city across Victoria Park to the Great Hall as envisaged when the University was first developed. The Heritage report is not prepared by an independent party. I attach a copy of a heritage report prepared for The City of Sydney Council on Victoria Park which includes significant discussion on this area and its connected vista to The Great Hall. The heritage report submitted with the proposal uses comments from the 1920's of the then Dean of Architecture to support this development. Prof Wilkonson I'm sure did not intend that this site would be for a building of the size and bulk proposed and definitely not a "floating box:.

Please reconsider this proposal as inappropriate. Sydney University is not an appropriate institution to let it have free reign over its own development proposals. Over the past 50 years it has demonstrated time and again that it cannot be trusted with its own heritage conservation. The examples where other authorities have had to step in at the last moment as the bulldozers are fired up and ready to strike include:

1. Institute for the Deaf and Blind - intended demolition 1960
2. Darlington Public School - 1975 intended demolition and a reprieve at last minute for this 1870 built Gothic public school The rest of the surrounding buildings had already been demolished including Darlington Town Hall, Post Office and 650 terrace homes
3. Fisher's Home -82 Alma Street 1980 demolished
4. Cypress Hall - built in 1859. Approval to be demolished in 2014. The City of Sydney Council at last minute demanded a review by an independent heritage architect who evaluated it properly and its now been retained and restored.

The Sydney University is listed as being in the top 10 globally most beautiful universities. This is largely due to the beauty and historical significance of the Great Hall. This needs to be protected. I am supportive of the museum being built just not between the remaining undeveloped are between the Great Hall and Victoria Park. The University despite what representations it may make has significant land on which this can be developed. The uninterrupted vista to and from the Great Hall does not need to be it.


They don't need to sell out their heritage because of 1 large donation.