Western Sydney Stadium Concept Proposal & Stage 1

16th August, 2016.
The Property Officer
Department of Planning and Environment
GPO Box 39
Sydney NSW 2001

Dear Sir / Madam,

Objection to Western Sydney Stadium (Concept and Stage 1 Demolition)

I would like to register my objection to the above proposal based on the following grounds:

1. Consultation: In my opinion, it does not appear that community consultation has occurred in the spirit of the SEARs Report, which states that consultation should include community groups. There are many groups in the Parramatta area directly affected by this proposal that have not had the opportunity to be part of consultation.

There are many groups who use this pool, including general members of the public, Scouts, free swimming lessons, free seniors Tuesdays, numerous schools (both state and private) for carnivals and swimming programs, water polo and diving clubs. As these groups have not been considered in the proposal, it can be said that the effects of the removal of the pool from this community has not been fully assessed. I would also suggest that the family of the person whose ashes have been buried within the pool grounds be contacted for consultation also.


2. There is also concern that the height of the proposed stadium will compromise the World Heritage listing of Old Government House. This important national building, along with the many other historic buildings in this area, need to be protected as part of our national heritage.

3. The project will also result in a change of use of Parramatta Park Land, which is Crown Land. In order for this land to progress to new use, there is a statutory process, which also needs to be followed.

In light of the above issues, I would like to suggest that the consultation process be re-started and the EIS process halted until this takes place and re-evaluation of community needs can occur.

Yours sincerely,

1. The EIS was prepared without consultation with swimmers or any of the local schools who use the pool for swimming classes or carnivals. It has therefor not in accordance with the requirements for a submission and should be rejected until the required consultation has taken place.
2. the proposed stadium outline could be fitted within the existing Stadium trust land without compromising the War Memorial pool.
The pool is on National trust land and it should be protected.
3. The 20 000 Sq Metre "future use ancillary development" cannot possibly be approved without any disclosure of what it could contain. 20 000 Sq Metres is 4 football pitches.
4. Old Government House is an important heritage building and its views would be devalued by a 42 metre high building just across the river from it.

Please do not demolish the Parramatta War Memorial Swimming Pool.

Objection One:
The EIS does not include in the title of the EIS that it also deals with the demolition of the Parramatta War Memorial Swimming centre as required under the EP&A Act 1979, therefore is misleading as to what the development is.

Objection Two:
The EIS only mentions 'Äncillary Services' to the stadium construction these 'ancillary services' are not defined and thus could be illegal use for crown land if used for commercial purposes in the future. We the community have no idea what they may be??

Objection Three:
The options assessment for the demolition of the existing stadium and the Parramatta War Memorial Swimming pool is flawed as the EIS does not consider to the extent necessary the options that should be considered for the location of a new 35,000 seat stadium in the Parramatta. In fact the EIS only mentions the do nothing option and the option to build the stadium in one location. The extent the options must be considered is to limit the effect on the World Heritage qualities of Parramatta Park and the impact on the amenity of the Parramatta community such as the Parramatta swimming centre. The extent necessary for consideration of options is thus to consider an option that moves the stadium sufficiently to the North West to maintain the swimming pool as well as the footprint of the new stadium. This is not done to the extent necessary in the EIS. The EIS is flawed as it does not consider putting the new stadium on industrial land now unused at Camellia(eg the Hardies site) or in the centre of the Rosehill Race course which is waste land not used for any use, or the EIS should consider the option to build the stadium at the old Parramatta golf course stadium. No analysis is given of alternative options or sites for the development before considering demolition of the existing stadium and swimming pool.

Objection Four:
The EIS does not have a proper consideration and reporting on full consultation to the extent necessary with the whole of the affected community by the proposed demolitions. Indeed the Stakeholders Environment Assessment report issued by the Department of Planning requires under consultation that "During the preparation of the EIS you(Venues NSW) must consult with relevant local, State, or Commonwealth Government authorities, service providers, community groups and affected landowners."

Venues NSW did not comply to the extent necessary with the Department of Plannings SEAR's report by consulting with all community groups during the EIS preparation. They did not consult with the users of the Parramatta War memorial swimming pool, learn to swim providers at the pool, PRIMARY and High schools who use the pool for Sport and PE and for swimming carnivals etc There is no evidence of any attempt through the Parramatta Councils database of information to contact the registered users and fare paying customers of the pool during the preparation of the EIS to consult these users. To only consult with NRL football clubs on 18th Jan 2016 and 9th Feb is not sufficient consultation for the preparation of the EISm or during the preparation of the EIS. Therefore the process of consultation must be redone as it is flawed.

Objection Five:
The Parramatta War Memorial swimming pool and centre is land Parramatta Council presently leases form the Parramatta Park Trust, this is Crown Land that was not identified in the EIS, thus the EIS is flawed. Further the proposed change of use of Crown land or land that is vested as part of the Parramatta Park Trust Act 2001 did not go through the statutory notification process as per the Crown Land Act process.

Objection Six:
World Heritage listed Old Government House and its vistas will be compromised by a stadium height of 42.5 metres. The size and scale of the proposed development at this site is inappropriate for the surrounding historically sensitive area of Parramatta Park. This flaw is caused by the inadequate assessment of alternative locations and options for the the development of a new 35,000 seat stadium that was not analysed for different optuions in the EIS.

RE: Western Sydney Stadium E.I.S.
I am concerned that the proposal for Western Sydney Stadium includes the demolition of the existing Parramatta War Memorial pool.
In Appendix N, Socio-economic, Section 5.1.1, it is mentioned that, "there may be a period between decommissioning of the existing Parramatta Swimming Centre and provision of a new facility where no aquatic centre facilities are available to the existing members and users of the centre."
This significantly understates this length of time, when in the previous sentence it is noted,
"... the timing for provision of a new facility is unknown and construction anticipated to take a minimum of two years...
Appendix N correctly acknowledges that, "Temporary loss of aquatic centre facilities would have a negative impact on the local community and would affect a broad range of members and users, including seniors, young children and their families, recreational and sport swimmers, as well as local schools for swimming carnival and swimming lesson uses."
Appendix D, Consultation, notes that "... the pool serves a large catchment with approximately 200,000 visits p/a." Furthermore, the pool underwent an approximate $8 million upgrade in 2007.
I am most concerned that the Western Sydney Stadium proposal would result in the demolition of the existing Parramatta pool, knowing that there is a minimum of two years before a new pool is provided.
Yours Sincerely,
Ian Johnson

What right do you have to take Crown Land and do whatever you like? This stadium is oversized and will dominate the precinct. It is not needed.
Why did you not follow the Statutory Notification process as set out in the Crown Land Act?
Where is the community consultation which was outlined in the SEARS report? The 'spirit' of community consultation has not been achieved in a meaningful way.
Please withdraw the EIS and address the community consultation and Crown Land Act requirements at he very least.

EIS Western Sydney Stadium.
List of objection issues:
1. The EIS process is the first Public consultation on this project.
This is not aligned with the EIS process that the Minister for Planning requires.
Even the mass postcards program only occurred after the EIS was put on public exhibition. I am at a loss at who was consulted at all. It seem that only the Football and league clubs only, then this is totally inappropriate as these are the direct [funded] recipients of the infrastructure development.

2. The EIS really fails to address the removal of Parramatta cities swimming pool. There is nothing on the impact and consequences of this denial of service on the wider community due to the loss of this public facility. There is no recognition of the impact on General public or school swimming especially over summers peak period that seems to have remained unacknowledged etc. if there was a plan, for an alternate venue, it will be three years before that facility. But the EIIS fails completely to address this even the title of the fails.

3. EIS is a vague document
EIS documents are to be crisp and factual , this is Especially vague, as it fails to define the nature of the Ancillary Services that are to be included in the EIS document. This could mean that Venues NSW could develop an office complex on the site as well as a hotel, Brothel and any other ancillary services, Casino perhaps, if the Minister approves the EIS.
Surely we should have a real EIS that defines what is to be included.

4. Orientation of the stadium.
From the outset the enlarged stadium footprint is skewed to take the maximum space on the site, so it will remove the Memorial pool and take more Crown land.
The footprint can fit on the existing site without encroaching on the pool site. There is a large amount of public space that this design specifies for the site that could coexist with the pool area if Venues NSW were to look at the Pool as part of the site redevelopment.
Thus the community would be a winner from this increase in public infrastructure, as there not been any public consultation prior to The Exhibition of the EIS. Venues NSW is effectively seeking a third world solution, and in this rushed process devaluing the Parramatta stadium precinct in the process.

5.Transportation
It's not to be directly serviced by Light rail; this deliberate choice is astounding given the crowds that the current stadium caters for. The plan is transport madness that exists is to get worse
The Modelling does not add up. If this was at Olympic park then it would have direct access to transport, but because it is Parramatta we get short changed! Parramatta need s facilities that generate such peak demand to have super adequate transport. It's a Growing city and what's proposed the location of the roadways and access points to make it unacceptable.

It is completely unacceptable that Parramatta Pool is to be closed. Not only is the pool a War Memorial, it is a local icon and valued community resource. Further, it seems that no genuine commitment to a replacement swimming pool has been given. It is a reasonable expectation that a timeline for the prompt provision of an alternative facility would be given. As a local mum, I know that the demolition of Parramatta Pool will hurt families like mine. Our community deserves better!

The proposal to expand the current stadium and remove Parramatta Pool is not only an outrage but short sighted and a complete failure of the democratic system and simply a denial and removal of existing public infrastructure to give to the hands of developers and the sporting elite.
In the current political climate of amalgamated Councils, increased population density throughout Sydney, Parramatta in particular with approved extensive high rise development It is a deliberate act to remove this public facility, effectively leaving residents of Parramatta with no public swimming pool further reducing leisure and recreational facilitates provided by Council / Government.
Mr Baird, it was your "Mandate" to provide more infrastructure back to residents via the amalgamation process as this was going to make available millions of dollars to be put back into the community as you put it, but in this case apparently at the expense of a public asset that a constitute will now need to pay a private consortium have the private to access what use to be public land whilst copping the insult of what use to be a viable and useful public facility has now been demolished.
Whilst it is easy to point the finger at the architects, who's "Dynamic abstraction of the intervention" sometimes gets in the way of practical application and a thing called "Design constraints and opportunities" the reality is they are designing as per the provided draft. There is suitable land for both the upgrade stadium and the pool to exist without the need for removal of or significant compromise of either facility and therefore the design must be changed!
Lastly, apart from all of the above listed and the outright ridiculous proposal to remove the pre-existing public infrastructure there is an increase of health issues in this modern world. Obesity diabetes etc. are on the increase in the younger population, a fact that both state and federal governments are aware of, I ask why remove a facility such as the pool which is a valuable and available public facility where such public health issues can be helped remedied simply for Parramatta Stadium, a non-public facility. Shame on you for even letting it get this far! . . . not even your spell check recognizes Parramatta?

Submission to proposed Western Sydney Stadium
(Concept 1 and Demolition)

I am a resident and rate payer of the city of Parramatta, as well as a regular pool user, and while I welcome the upgrade of the stadium, I am deeply concerned by the secrecy and the inadequacy of the community consultation surrounding the EIS. No community consultation, other than two fan forums held on 18 January and 9 February 2016 with representatives from NRL and Football Federation Australia (Consultation - Stakeholder and Community Consultation Outcomes Report, Appendix D, Venues NSW, dated 6 July 2016), was made during the preparation period of the EIS, in contravention of the Department of Planning's Secretary Environmental Assessment Requirements Report (Page 6, Consultation). Consequently, the impact the project on the rest of the community has not been taken into account.
Yet, the Parramatta War Memorial Pool plays a key role in the community, particularly given the distance from the ocean and from other pools. Its swim club and swim school are highly valued and utilized, and its facilities are used for recreation, fitness as well as essential water safety and learn to swim programs all year round. In summer, during school terms, it is also used every single week day by some 30 local private and public schools for their swimming carnivals and swimming programs. In the absence of any concrete plan for an alternative, all these pool users will have no venue to pursue these activities. The current proposal does not take the needs of these users into consideration. Even in the event of a new outdoor pool of a similar standard being built in Parramatta, the lack of any concrete immediate plan means that the community will be without a pool for several years at best, and possibly for ever.
In addition, the Parramatta War Memorial Pool leases land from the Parramatta Park Trust and is Crown Land, which was not identified in the EIS. The proposed change of use of Crown Land or land that is vested as part of the Parramatta Park Trust Act 2001 did not go through the statutory notification process as per the Crown Land Act.
Furthermore, the application includes "20,000 sqm of future use ancillary development" but provides no detail as to what this development will be. This lack of transparency is totally unacceptable.
Finally, Parramatta is a site of great historical significance featuring many heritage buildings, including the World Heritage Listed Old Government House, which could all be compromised by the vicinity of a 42.5 metre high stadium. The impact of the new stadium on neighbouring heritage sites has not been fully assessed.
Therefore, I wish to express my strong objection to the current proposal for the building of the new stadium as it stands, and submit that the current flawed EIS be abandoned and a new EIS be carried out with proper and thorough community involvement, inclusive of all shareholders, so that the upgrade of the stadium does not in any way impact on or involves the demolition of Parramatta War Memorial Pool, or compromise Parramatta's historically highly significant heritage sites.

Planning Services
Department of Planning and Environment
GPO Box 39
Sydney, NSW, 2001.
(via www.majorprojects.planning.nsw.gov.au/page/on-exhibition)

Attention: Director - Social and other Infrastructure Assessments

Dear Sir / Madam,

WESTERN SYDNEY STADIUM CONCEPT PROPOSAL AND STAGE 1 DEMOLITION

APPLICATION NO SSD 7534

SUBMISSION FROM-

Kevin Eadie
21 St Georges Cres
Drummoyne, NSW, 2047.

In the Sydney press of 20 July 2016 the NSW Department of Planning & Environment advertised the exhibition of the above Development Application. The closing date for submissions was 19 August 2016.

I object to this proposal on the following grounds -

The stadium is to be built on publicly-owned land. As I understand it, the land is owned by the Parramatta Park Trust. What is more, much of the site is public open space. This form of open space will inevitably become ever more valuable for public recreation as the density of Parramatta, both residential and commercial, increases with time. Domestic residences in the region will not have the backyards of today's detached houses.

The entire Parramatta Park should be "Heritage" listed, if it is not already so listed, to protect it from alienation by the vested interests associated with the sporting industry..

When the existing stadium was granted approval for construction by the late Justice Jim McClelland, he made it a condition of approval that the new stadium was to be contained within the footprint of the then Cumberland Oval. What has changed?

The various football codes are part of a multi-million dollar industry. I object to their being allowed to build on publicly-owned land. They should purchase or lease their own land and pay for their buildings out of their own funds, just as any other commercial enterprise would be required to do.

As I understand it, a second similar-sized stadium is intended to be built at Olympic Park. That site is just seven kilometres from the subject Parramatta site. The rigour of such urban planning must surely be questioned, especially as the two sites are destined to be almost directly connected by a future light rail line.

Demolition of the existing public swimming pool should not be allowed to proceed until a new replacement pool has been built and commissioned for public use.

The planned provision for parking for 500 vehicles is excessive. In the interests of efficient access and movement in the vicinity, reduced cost of road and parking infrastructure, and in the interests of public health, active transport to the venue (walking, cycling) should be encouraged.

F - ParraStad1.doc
17 August 2016.

END

I regularly attend sport events at Parramatta Stadium, or am visiting nearby parts of Parramatta. My most common mode of transport is cycling, for several reasons includig physical health, environmental reasons, and avoiding traffic congestion and parking issues. I am asking for safe bike access to/from the stadium precinct with secure undercover bike parking to be provided for all those attending events. I'd like to ask that bicycle access be separate from pedestrian and motor vehicle access since this is most safe.

As a regular attendee of sporting events at the Parramatta Stadium and one who frequently rides my bike to such events (to avoid traffic congestion and parking issues), I am asking that consideration for safe bike access to/from the stadium precinct with secure undercover bike parking is provided for all those attending events. Bicycle access needs to be separate from pedestrian access to provide safety and security for all

As I have been a resident of Parramatta Council area for 67 years I feel it necessary to voice my concerns over the proposal currently under consideration for the demolishing and rebuilding of Parramatta Stadium, the EIS of which proposal is currently on exhibition.

Firstly I do not understand why this EIS is being exhibited when there has been no consultation with ALL stakeholders. The Dept of Planning regulations stipulate that consultation should take place during the preparation of the EIS. To my knowledge there has been no public meeting for consultation and no notification to the general public of the area about the proposal. It is a matter of urgency that the EIS is removed from exhibition and meaningful community consultation is undertaken.

Secondly, nowhere in the proposal is there a mention of the demolition of the Parramatta War Memorial Pool even though the plan on display shows that the proposed boundaries of the new stadium are over the pool area. Parramatta pool is an extremely valuable public resource for the area. Our distance from the coast and the climate of western Sydney make it an invaluable resource for schools, families and people of all ages as a respite from the heat of summer (which is increasing with climate change), a sporting facility and a general health resource. There are a number of schools in the area and close to the pool which make regular use of its facilities and its destruction would make it very difficult for these schools to have a sport and swimming option for their students.

Thirdly, that area of Parramatta has virtually no transport infrastructure to move the numbers of people who are being attracted to the stadium. O'Connell Street already carries large volumes of traffic which it often struggles to manage as does the whole of Parramatta CBD and surrounding areas.
Fourthly, the War Memorial Pool is situated on Crown Land and my understanding is change of use of Crown Land must go through a statutory notification process as set out in the Crown Lands Act. This does not appear anywhere in the EIS.

Lastly, in Parramatta Park we have the historic Old Government House, one of the earliest colonial buildings and an extremely important part of Australian history. The building of an enormous stadium as close as is planned, is totally inappropriate and compromises both the historical buildings and the use of Crown Land as open space for the people of the area
Overall I feel that the EIS was not prepared in accordance with legal protocols and should be withdrawn and full consultation carried out.

I wish to strongly protest about the latest plans for the redevelopment of Parramatta Stadium. The proposed increase is around 8000 people, or about 35%. Yet to achieve this, the height of the stadium seems to be almost doubling, and the footprint seems to be doing the same. The massive loss of amenity, particularly the proposed loss of the Parramatta Swimming Pool, is not justifiable. By simply adding stands to either end of the stadium (as was once proposed), several thousand more seats could be added.

The only justification that I could find in the EIS for making these massive changes seems to be to allow greater access to O'Connell St and transport.

This project has been characterised by drastic changes for which no supporting information has been provided. When it was announced some months ago (and considerably later than the plan to rebuild the stadium) that the pool would also have to go, there were no reports provided about what investigations had been done, what alternatives had been considered. My local MP Geoff Lee gave verbal explanations about asbestos and the alignment of the field to due north, but wasn't able to provide anything substantive and certainly nothing written. Due process has not been followed. Mr Lee's view is that he can't jeopardise the investment in Parramatta. But this is no longer a good investment. It will destroy great facilities in Parramatta with no promises to rebuild, and intrude on its skyline.

Due process has not been followed. Decisions made behind closed doors with no justification leave one to wonder who is really benefitting from this development.

Please modify the proposal so that the Swimming Pool can remain.

OBJECTIONS TO APPLICATION BY VENUES NSW FOR PROPOSED STADIUM CONCEPT PROPOSAL AND STAGE 1 DEMOLITION

I am writing this letter of objection to this proposal on the following grounds

ALIENATION OF CROWN LAND

1824 Earl Bathurst ordered Gov. Darling not to sell, or in any other way devolve the Crown Lands for the benefit of private individuals or commercial enterprise.
Earl Bathurst also,in the same Order, directed that land be set aside for the recreation of the public and not for private interests
Parramatta Park Trust are trustees for Parramatta Park under the Parramatta Park Trust Act and they have not acted in accordance with that Act in protecting Crown Land for public recreation
The land on which the War Memorial Swimming Pool is situated is Crown Land and as such, cannot be used for commercial interests nor to be sold to private individuals or organisations,
The swimming pool land is protected by the Parramatta Park Trust Act 2001. Therefore, it cannot be used for commercial purposes.

LACK OF PROPER COMMUNITY CONSULTATION
SEARS requires "relevant local, State or Commonwealth Government authorities, service providers, community groups and affected landowners" - this was not undertaken,
The only community consultation occurred BEFORE THE EIS was put on consultation with targeted supporters of The Balmain Tigers, Canterbury Bankstown Bulldogs and Parramatta Ells. This is NOT "community consultation". The Balmain Tigers tried the same "community consultation" 5+ years ago with regard to the Tigers development the site is still not built on - I wonder why?
The above community consultation results are STATISTICALLY INVALID. It is an insult to anyone in the community - they can see through the guff. "Don't teach your grandmother to suck eggs". I am 72 years old and have a Credit in University Statistics.

IMPACTS ON OLD GOVERNMENT WORLD HERITAGE LISTING
Old Government House will have issues with overshadowing.
The new stadium will impact on line of sights from Old Government House
UNESCO may well take away the World Heritage Listing of Old Government House and its curtilages
This listing is linked with 10 other sites in Australia
It will make Australia a laughing stock with the rest of the world

ADVERSE IMPACTS ON THE ASSESSMENT OF THE PARRAMATTA FEMALE FACTORY BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
The Parramatta Female Factory is currently being assessed for National and UNESCO Heritage listing - the building of the new stadium will severely impact on these two pending heritage listings.

SIZE AND BULK OF THE PROPOSED NEW STADIUM AND ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENTS.
A 42.5m (12 storey) building has too much bulk
A car park for 30,000 peorple will clause gridlock in the Parramatta streets
The future development of an additional 20,000sqm...for ancillary uses CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS PART OF THE APPROVAL PROCESS AS IT DOES NOT STATE THE INTENDED PURPOSE AS IT DOES NOT STATE THE INTENDED PURPOSE.

Therefore, I am objecting on all the above grounds. The stadium is not appropriate for the site.

A far better site would be at Camellia with the present Stadium site being converted back to open space for passive recreation.

ALICE KERSHAW

I submit an objection to the proposed Western Sydney Stadium (Concept and Stage 1 Demolition).

This proposal did not adequately take into account community consultation which is required by the Department of Planning's SEARS Report "During the preparation of the EIS, you must consult with the relevant local, State or Commonwealth Government authorities, service providers, community groups and affected landowners". This proposal demonstrated community consultation to have only occurred by way of x 2 "Fan Forums" from the sporting community. There is no demonstrated consultation with community groups which is such an oversight that it must be re-dressed to be a compliant proposal.

The EIS neglects to address Crown Land leased by The Parramatta War Memorial Pool from Parramatta Park Trust. The proposed change of use of Crown Land or land that is vested as part of the Parramatta Park Trust Act 2001- did not go through the statutory notification process as per the Crown Land Act which must be addressed. Again another significant compliance oversight.

This proposal lacks long term vision for the region. Sporting trends come and go and bring in a lot less money to the economy than tourism. The project justification and public benefits highlight the ability to bring 'big ticket events' to the area and to create and support thousands of jobs yet the employment estimates are insignificant at 90 jobs ongoing and just 160 for the short term construction period. 'big ticket events' do not create thousands of jobs and the teams who work on these events are usually touring with the event so only create minimal local employment for a very short period of time.

This site is such an important site in Australia's and Sydney's history. It will be an important site for the very long term future. A stadium will not. The existing stadium has already apparently passed its use by date after only 30 years and is proposed to be dismantled. Why choose this significant historic site to cyclically build and demolish on. Choose a less significant site.

The Project Justification and public benefits do not reference a community need for a larger stadium.

Dear Officers,

My name is Paul Murphy; I am a home owner and ratepayer in Parramatta, the father of a four year old boy and we strongly support the Western Sydney Wanderers including but not limited to my son's attendance of weekly Wanderers Junior Football clinics.

My wife and I were married on the steps of Old Government House at Parramatta Park.

Parramatta Park and the Parramatta Heritage precinct on both sides of the head of Parramatta River, where I understand Governor Phillip found fertile land to sustain the starving colony in 1789 and established Australia's first seat of Government (which were sacred men's and women's sites since time immemorial before that) deserve the highest level of respect, regard and dignity in any administrative decision which affects them.

We strongly support the vulnerable public assets under threat by a seeming torrent of development applications which appear to geared towards benefitting the developers and the NSW Government Treasury coffers rather than the people of Parramatta and Greater Western Sydney themselves or fans of any football code.

In relation to the stadium redevelopment, it has been brought to my attention that a redesign which adjusts the angle of the playing field by just 15 degrees would enable Parramatta Pool to remain in its current location.

I note further the concerns of NPRAG and concur with them that:

1. The SEARs Report issued by Department of Planning states under Consultation that "During the preparation of the EIS, you must consult with the relevant local, State or Commonwealth Government authorities, service providers, community groups and affected landowners" The Consultation Report lodged by Venues NSW reports under Community Consultation "Two Fan Forums were held on 18 January and 9 February 2016. The forums included representatives from the NRL teams - Bulldogs, West Tigers and Parramatta Eels, the Western Sydney Wanderers and from Football Federation Australia" Therefore we believe Venues NSW did not comply with the Department of Planning SEARs report by consulting with community groups during the preparation of the EIS. The EIS is premature and should be pulled from exhibition and meaningful consultation with community groups be carried out and a new consultation report submitted again with a new EIS submission.
2. The Parramatta War Memorial Pool currently leases land from the Parramatta Park Trust; this is Crown Land that was not identified in the EIS. Further the proposed change of use of Crown Land or land that is vested as part of the Parramatta Park Trust Act 2001- did not go through the statutory notification process as per the Crown Land Act.
3. World Heritage Listed Old Government House and its Vistas will be compromised by a stadium height of 42.5 metres. This size of development is inappropriate for surrounding historically sensitive area.

The people of Parramatta have not been properly consulted in any of the development proposals that the State Government seems so desperate to impose with breathtaking arrogance and speed. The stadium redevelopment in its current form must not proceed. More care must be taken with the unique and exceptional natural and historical public assets in that area.

The demolition of the parramatta pool should only take place if it is replaced first within parramatta park or adjoining.
The pool is used by many people for various reasons. One of these would be triathlons were the pool is a vital part.

The Heritage nature of the park also needs considerable consideration. This new stadium could overpower the park. If it is going to be built all options to mitigate an eyesore should be taken. Things like:
- appropriate colours
- landscaping
- building heights and development areas close to the government house protected.

Parking in the stadium should be made affordable (I.e. set increase and fees to cpi) especially for non stadium use times.

Do not demolish Parramatta Pools! All year round it provides an important space for exercise and relaxation. The facilities are excellent and it is an important place for many to learn to swim and about water safety. We need this valuable public facility.