I support the project, it will bring more tourism to the area and allow more people to come and increase the popularity and revenue to the village

I object to this development proposal as I do not think it supports the community at all, and I believe it undermines the historical value of the site, and is attempting far too much change and bas*rdisation of the beautiful heritage building. It is also attempting
to undermine the riparian land on the river embankment to build apartments, disguised as a hotel. This is a threat to planning restrictions, & the local flora and fauna (it is a known platypus habitat).

I also call into question the nature of the conduct during the tender process for the Gaol, as I understand there were various community and local resident bids that were either more community focused, or substantially more in value, yet this developer was awarded. For this reason, It doesn’t not stack up logically as to why this developer was chosen as winning the tender, which is compounded by the fact that this is a largely unpopular proposal. It does not champion community like other bidders, nor does it respect or try to showcase the beauty and historical significance of the site.

I object to this proposal. There are far more appropriate approaches for developing this beautiful and culturally/historically community significant site.

I support the proposal, I think it would be great for the town

I think it will be good for the village economically socially and will add to the character of the village.
I don’t think the bulky nature of the hotel at the Southern end should be allowed to proceed and should be reduced in height to one level.

I support the project

Berrima Gaol is one of the few remaining buildings in Australia dating back to colonial times and as such is a significant heritage site.
Whilst I am not opposed to the adaptive re-use of the gaol the extent of the proposed redevelopment by Blue Sox risks impacting the heritage context and potentially the broader urban impact on Berrima itself. I am also concerned that the development may impact the biodiversity and water management at the rear of the site overlooking the Wingecarribee river.

From what I understand due process has not been followed regarding the consultation process. Local residents were not informed
about the concept plans until very recently and there was inadequate consultation throughout the period since Blue Sox acquired the gaol. There should have been much better community engagement prior to finalisation of the plans to redevelop the site.

My preference is to look at a smaller development which is more respectful of the heritage site upon which the gaol sits, which has a lower environmental impact and to engage with the local community more holistically.

The proposed hotel concerns me for its overwhelming bulk adjacent to a very significant historical building, and, in fact, for its potential to dominate much of the skyline in this beautifully preserved village.

I am not anti the hotel per se, rather its huge scale which, if built, would be almost the dominant feature in the Berrima landscape, with the possible exception of the Court House.

Could it be built with one storey less? Could it be less bulky? Could it be redesigned to not reach down to the Wingecarribee River, and potentially limit public access to the lovely walk along the river's edge.

One of the reasons Berrima is such an appealing place for visitors is because of its unique historical buildings dating back to Georgian times. That appeal doesn't exist by accident. It exists because the local residents have fought hard against inappropriate developments, and, so far, won. Hence, the popularity of Berrima as a treasured place to visit bringing people and the tourism dollars they spend in the Shire.

I believe the best way to sustain and maintain the significant historical building that is the old gaol, is 'adaptive re-use'. Give it a means to be supported financially and it wil last well into the future. This proposal would seem to address that issue, but its scale is way too big for the charming historic village of Berrima.

I think the proposal looks great and will bring a lot of value to the area

My husband and I live in close proximity to this project and have been residents for 13 years. We object to this proposal on a number of grounds, not least of which is the profound, deleterious effect this project will have on the built heritage of the existing gaol, but also on the heritage fabric and amenity of Berrima.

The proposed development of three storey 'motel' units, obliterating the view of the western elevation of the historic wall, represents the height of inappropriate and gross overdevelopment in the immediate vicinity of the riparian zone of the Wingecarribee river. This is completely out of keeping with the heritage nature and feel of Berrima and it's Georgian influences. The proposed development is clumsy, ill-conceived and centred on gross commercialisation rather than heritage protection. Importantly, should the current owner fail commercially, then the community will be stuck with a three storey white elephant which has damaged the heritage fabric of the building. The applicant should be directed to amend their proposal to ensure that any accomodation requirements are contained within the existing walls of the goal, not perched outside. This historic item in the last remaining intact Georgian Village on the Australia mainland deserves much better than the poorly conceived proposal that has been lodged.

Further, the development of these 'motel' units outside the goal walls will significantly increase runoff and contribute to flooding which is already an issue on this part of the Wingecarribee River and which we, as residents with a property on the river, can attest to.

We are very concerned at the impact on amenity of amplified music. Berrima sits in a small valley hence any amplified sound bounces around the village and causes significant impacts on amenity. The applicant proposes many functions per week and we believe this will have an excessive and damaging impact on the amenity of what is a very small village. We are opposed to amplified music being permitted on this site.

The proposal provides no community benefit of any kind or recognition of the history of the site and it's connection to Berrima, significantly as the goal has been part of the community for nearly 160 years. Notably it is also the site of the execution under capital punishment of six people, and the sad and complex history of the goal is not being preserved for future generations.

We urge the panel to refuse this application.

I am Aunty Trish Levett [Kalawatawarra] a Gundungurra Aboriginal Custodian and Elder.
Berrima Correctional Centre operated as a women’s prison during two separate periods: from 2001 to 2011 as a medium-security facility, and again from 2018 to 2020.
During the earlier period, I worked as an Aboriginal Health Worker with the Wingecarribee Community Centre. In that role, I visited the gaol every fortnight to deliver cultural programs, including traditional dance, to First Nations women inmates. I also acted as an advocate for the women, raising their concerns and issues directly with the Governor-General.
Aboriginal people, particularly the Gundungurra, have maintained an enduring spiritual and cultural association with the lands and waters of Berrima, including the former Berrima Correctional Centre and its surrounds, which lie along the sacred Wingecarribee River, known traditionally as Woonjeegaribay. The tributaries, wetlands, floodplains and riparian zones of the Woonjeegaribay are the place that holds our Gundungurra Law; these waterscapes are sacred to our people and remain central to Gundungurra law, ceremony, and identity.
I acknowledge the decision of the High Court of Australia in New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council v Minister Administering the Crown Lands Act [2016] HCA 50, which finally determined that the site was not claimable Crown land under the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 (NSW) at the time the claim was lodged in 2012.
That decision, however, does not extinguish continuing Gundungurra connection to Country, nor does it preclude the recognition or determination of Mortimer v Auswide Services Ltd T/as Caloola Farm (In Liquidation) [2016] ACTSC 282.
Berrima Gaol is listed on the State Heritage Register and forms an integral part of the nationally significant Berrima Conservation Area; it is situated on the banks of the Woonjeegaribay River. The imposing sandstone walls of Berrima Gaol were always intended to be read in direct and dramatic contrast with the natural sandstone escarpment and the living, sacred Woonjeegaribay River below, Country walked, fished, camped, and cared for by Gundungurra people for countless generations. That relationship between the built colonial form and the enduring Gundungurra landscape is the very essence of Berrima’s nationally recognised heritage significance. It must not be compromised.
Regrettably, the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report (ACHAR) prepared by Austral Archaeology for Blue Sox Pty Ltd relies on desktop review and visual inspection only. The assessment falls short of the rigorous methodology expected for a site of such sacred and cultural sensitivity and scientific potential. The decision not to conduct archaeology, citing potential asbestos contamination, appears difficult to justify as asbestos risks are routinely and safely managed on contaminated sites in NSW. A desktop study and walkover is not considered adequate for a site where Traditional Owners know of burial risk.
I have reasonable cause to believe Aboriginal human remains and significant relics are present in or around the grounds of Berrima Correctional Centre. Gundungurra knowledge-holders know the area, especially above and below the riverside sandstone shelters and the gaol grounds, is highly likely to contain burial sites and other cultural material, there are natural sandstone shallow rock shelters along the river walk all the way to Lambie’s Well. Their undisturbed protection or proper investigation and management is not only a legal requirement but a fundamental ethical and cultural obligation.
Section 86 of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 (as it currently stands after the 2023–2025 reforms) makes it an offence to knowingly disturb or excavate land that contains (or is reasonably likely to contain) an Aboriginal object or an Aboriginal place. The 2020–2025 Due Diligence Code of Practice and the new AHIP guidelines explicitly state that where there is “reasonable likelihood” of subsurface objects, test excavation is normally required. The Code of Practice for the Archaeological Investigation of Aboriginal Objects in NSW (Heritage NSW, 2023) also mandates Gundungurra custodian participation in surveys, inspections, and digs.
As a Gundungurra Elder, before any ground disturbing development can lawfully proceed, and because there is reasonable cause to believe the site contains Aboriginal objects including human remains, I require properly controlled subsurface testing with a Gundungurra custodian of my choosing present as cultural advisor/officer. There is an ethical and cultural imperative that Aboriginal Gundungurra custodians be present during any archaeological dig on these sensitive cultural lands. Presence ensures respect for cultural protocols, incorporates Traditional Knowledge, and fulfils obligations to protect our heritage.
Gundungurra people assert our inherent right to self-determination in relation to our traditional Country, including the lands and waters of the former Berrima Correctional Centre and our sacred Woonjeegaribay River. In the spirit of self-determination and in accordance with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which Australia has endorsed, Gundungurra knowledge-holders must participate in good-faith mediation in relation to current ownership, any future resale, or ongoing redevelopment of the site. True self-determination means far more than token consultation, it requires that Gundungurra voices, knowledge, and authority are placed at the center of every decision that affects our cultural heritage and continuing connection to this sacred place.
I strongly encourage Blue Sox Group Pty Ltd and its successors in title to actively seek Gundungurra partnership and consent at every stage of the development process. Meaningful, early, and respectful engagement with Gundungurra knowledge-holders is not only a legal and ethical obligation under NSW heritage and planning laws; it is a practical and powerful way to ensure the project proceeds with cultural legitimacy, community support, and lasting reconciliation outcomes.

The current redevelopment proposals, particularly the multi-storey apartment buildings planned outside the gaol walls, represent a profound intrusion. They would permanently fracture the protected, uninterrupted Georgian vistas from the village down to the river, vistas deliberately preserved for almost two centuries, and threaten the habitat of the endangered platypus and the ecological and spiritual integrity of Woonjeegaribay itself. The sandstone landscape below the gaol connects to the Berrima Wildlife Reserve, supporting a diverse array of native fauna and acting as a key corridor for aquatic and semi-aquatic species. During my care for Country over the years I have seen blue-tongue and water dragons, echidna, wallaby, wombat (including a large burrow about 500 meters from the gaol), platypus, and many birds such as galahs, gang-gangs, black cockatoos, kookaburras, magpies, blue wrens, honeyeaters, and my totem, the dragonfly [Kalawatawarra].
Along the riverwalk are scar tree evidence of my people’s occupation, these places also form my lived experience as I honour my Ancestors. Our Gundungurra custodians hold irreplaceable knowledge of Country, including songlines, ceremonial sites, and spiritual connections and the journey of Gurangatch and Mirrigan. Excluding my people from decision making in regards to this development risks desecration and erodes trust.
Recent projects, like the Dargan Shelter excavation in Gundungurra/Dharug Country, 2025 study, were found in a cave known as Dargan Shelter, believed to be the oldest known site of human activity at high elevation on the Australian continent, this study is a demonstration of how custodians' input has uncovered 20,000-year-old artifacts while ensuring repatriation and reburial of remains.
The Gundungurra Elders are willing to work collaboratively with adaptive reuse developers of the former Berrima Gaol, the Wingecarribee Shire Council, and the NSW Government toward outcomes that respect and protect both the Colonial and Gundungurra layers of this landscape. However, any plan that sacrifices the natural sandstone backdrop, the sacred river, the riparian zone, its endangered platypus population, and the historic view corridors for private profit development cannot be supported and is fundamentally incompatible with Gundungurra self-determination and the long-term heritage values of Berrima.

I respectfully urge the Minister Paul Scully MP to require a more thorough and respectful investigation, including carefully controlled subsurface testing, to ensure both Aboriginal and colonial heritage values are fully understood and appropriately safeguarded before any further decisions are made.