To whom it may concern;
North Sydney Council hereby objects to the Marist Brothers College application (SSD 10473). The details and reasoning for the objection will be provided within the timeframe (extension) granted by DPEI today for submissions to be made by 24 March, 2021.

Key issues of concern:
1. The EIS does not address all the SEARs. There is no information on the traffic impacts of the car park access and egress onto Carlow Street on the local roads, for example:
- there is no assessemnt of these vehicular movements at the intersection of Carlow and West Streets
- There is no reference to the Tucker Street/Carlow Street intersection
- will the Carlow Street car park egress requires any restrictions such as left in, left out.
- There is no assessment of the impact of the exiting vehicles on the functionality of the Carlow/Miller Street traffic signals and queuing of vehicles travelling in an easterly direction.
2. Interactions with surrounding land uses - the EIS does not identify the childcare centre at St Leonards Park and the numbers of pedestrians and children using the southern footpath on Carlow Street to access the traffic signal crossing of Miller Street. The EIS also does not identify other users and uses at St Leonards Park such as location recreation and special events.
3. Pedestrian safety and footpath widhts - the increase in numbers of students will place pressure on footpath widths on Carlow Street and Miller Street, particularly near the intersection of Carlow and Miller Street. The Miller Street footpath near the intersection can have crowing and restricted movement due to the bus stop for northbound buses, combined with parents with strollers. Carlow Street footpath needs to be wide enough to allow 2 wheelcahirs to pass each other, and two strollers to pass each other.
3. Parking provision is too high. Providing high levels (above DCP requirements) of parking leads to increased traffic generation. The EIS identifies parking is provided for St Marys and parish uses, however, this is also available for staff parking. The location of this facility, a block away from the new Sydney Metro station entrance allows for minimal parking to be provided on site. The mode share target(p94) states that there will only be a small shift to public transport, and hence the large number of parking spaces is required. This is not consistent with approaches to parking provision on a site which is in such close proximity to a turn up and go metro rail service.
4. Bulk and height of development on Carlow and Miller Street is too great. It does not relate to existing built form. For example:
- the streetscape studies (p84) link the building height to the height of the church - the top of the church being used to justify the height of the new building, is the top of the cross that is attached to the top of the church. The streetscape study should be using the height of the roof structure of the church.
- The streetscape study refers to the stanton library building. The library building is set a long way back from Miller Street and has an articulated facade. It is not a high building located on Miller Street, so it is not a reasonable streetscape comparison
- The building does not respond to North Sydney Hotel. This is a significant feature in the locality and its prominence will be lost due to the overpowering scale of the building at the corner of Carlow and Miller St. The southern end of the building has been designed to step down to the Presbytery, but there is no similar treatment for the North Sydney Hotel.
the building does not respond to the buidlings at north Sydney oval. These budlings have been set back from the kerb line with plantings to soften the scale. As well, the scale of these buildings is significantly lower than the proposed Marist buildings. If built to the current proposed form, the new Marist building on the corner of Miller and Carlow will dominate the streetscape.
- the building on the corner of Carlow and Miller Street does not relate to the streetscape of Carlow Street. It dominates the Marist Brothers residences on Carlow Street, which although part of the site area, have been designed as, and are used as residential huses. The proposed new building is over twice the height of these houses and has no relationship to them.
5. Management of peolpe flows at the pedestrian building entrance on Carlow Street - this needs to be re-designed to avoid conflict with other pedestrian users of the footpath. There is insufficient space to manage the large student numbers and crowding around the entrance, assocaited with it being a meeting point. The redesign needs to ensure free movement for pedestrians walking past the school to access or leave the park and the bus stop.
6. the traffic modelling needs reassessment. It states that the traffic numbers on Ridge Street (a key fundamental part of the traffic analysis) are based on traffic inputs to the Strategic Travel Model which show Ridge Street is the feeder road into the Western Harbour Tunnel. It also notes that this does not align with public information on the Western Harbour Tunnel. This conflict on traffic inputs needs to be addressed. It is showing a 2000% increase on Ridge Street traffic.
7. Preferred carpark access - Ridge Street would be the best location for access and egress for the site as a whole. This should be assessed when correct traffic volumes for Ridge Street are available. The benefits of encouraging Ridge Street for access are the intersection at Ridge and West Street - this is a three way intersection with clear vehicular movement patterns. The other key intersection of Ridge and Miller Street is a signalised four way configuration, which allows for movements in all directions.
8. Safety issues of using Carlow Street as main vehicular access - the Carlow/West/Emmett Street interesection has an offset configuration. Emmett/West Street is diagonally opposite Carlow/ West Street intersection. A zebra crossing is also present on West Street. This ia a very difficult intersection and is used by students from North Sydney Girls walking from the bus stop on Miller Street to their school entranc at the end of Emmett Street. Having the main carpark entrance on Carlow Street will increase traffic at this already difficult intersection and reduce pedestrian safety at the crossing.
9. Building setbacks - the building at the corner of Miller and Carlow street needs to have increased setback from Miller Street and Carlow Street and increased distance to the Marist Brothers residences on Carlow Street. This would reduce the impact of th building on the streetscape, and allow for increased plantings to soften the appearance of the building and provide shade for students.

refer attachment

Scale and Design of the proposed 5-storey additions along Carlow St
• From an architectural and aesthetic viewpoint, the proposed five storey additions at the corner of Miller St and Carlow St is sound, functional, and utilitarian; however, it is massive in scale and devoid of any features that acknowledges and affirms its Heritage surroundings. Surely a design that is consistent with the objectives of North Sydney DCP 2013 and “Conservation Area Study for the Holtermann Estate Conservation Area, 1998” is possible. As an example, Wenona College down Miller St and Ridge St has managed over the years to expand and keep it aligned with its surroundings (Commercial along Miller St and Residential along Walker St). If approved, for years to come, the massive scale of the Marist School Development proposal will stand out as an anomaly and incongruous with its immediate surroundings especially along Carlow St. Carlow St is a suburban, quiet oasis amidst an urban CBD and serves to remind the community of its history and heritage and the need for preservation. This 5-storey building addition which will be as tall as St Mary’s Church, and will span from Miller St to #25 Carlow St, will be visually odd and out of place. The design should incorporate features that will enhance Carlow St’s Heritage history.
Noise and privacy
• As the construction will take 4 years to complete, a solution must be found to minimise noise and maintain residents’ privacy. A temporary enclosure similar to that of the construction of Victoria Cross should be a requirement. A lot of residents have been working from home due to the pandemic, and it is likely it will stay this way for some time.

• When the School becomes operational, all glass windows that would be installed in classrooms facing Carlow St ought to be double-glazed for noise reduction and tinted for privacy.
Underground parking
• The underground parking that will be built under Carlow St will span the length and width of Carlow St. It is very possible that with the increase in vehicular traffic and the excavation of soil, structural damages to the nearby residential houses could occur at any time. Which government department(s) will be responsible for remediation and compensation.

Street parking
• Carlow St is a 2-way suburban street that provides parking space to visitors and residents alike. The 5-storey addition of the School will span across an existing 20 public car spaces. What will happen to these car spaces, during construction (interim), and when School is operational (permanent)? As is, it is already difficult to find a parking space both on weekdays and weekends along Carlow St. One possibility is to expands the coverage of Area 21(which Carlow St sits on) for residents.
Air Quality and pollution
• An underground parking with 71 car spaces will emit pollution from car fumes and heat. Where will these harmful elements be funnelled to? Consideration must be provided to the residents of Carlow St.
Traffic congestion
• With a single lane for entry and an exit for the underground car park spanning the length and width of Carlow St, and with the 2 on-site pick-up/drop-off areas, and Carlow St being a 2-way street, traffic congestion will most likely occur with the convergence of vehicles trying to enter/exit the School coming off east (Miller St) and west (West St).

Piazza
• Is this necessary? there is already the St Leonards Park nearby. The space allocated for a piazza could be used functionally by the School and helps reduce the scale of the additions.

As a resident of an adjacent property to the proposed Marist College development I have concerns about the following:
1. Privacy, the architectural drawings show windows and balconies on the Western elevation that will overlook the residences and gardens of the Carlow St/ Cassins Ave properties which is not the case with the existing structures.
2. Shadow/ light, the new building will impinge on morning light and cast shadows across the residences and gardens of Carlow St/ Cassins Ave properties which is not the case with the existing structures.
3. Traffic & Parking, Carlow St and West St are already in grid-lock on school days (during school zone periods), morning is particularly problematic as you also have residents trying to leave for work as well as the school related traffic. While there are detailed plans for dealing with traffic during the construction period, no satisfactory assessment of the impact of traffic with 800 additional students or a 67% increase in student numbers has been provided to residents. It is almost impossible to turn right into Miller St from Carlow St during the morning peak and is even difficult to turn left as this time, due to students alighting from buses and crossing Miller St to enter the school, even if the school entrance moves to Carlow St, this pedestrian traffic with continue to be an issue, especially with a 67% increase in student numbers.
Carlow St and West St are small local streets with one lane in either direction and parking on both sides of the street. Parking in the area is already at a premium, so removing parking spaces to improve traffic flow does not seem to be a sensible option. Moving the pick up/ drop off entrance and exit to Ridge St which has less residences would seem an alternative solution.
The proposed 1,500 capacity amphitheatre will also increase traffic congestion and create parking issues at times outside of school hours, particularly on the weekend. Currently if there is an event on at St Leonards Park or North Sydney Oval on a weekend, without anything going on at the school, there is traffic congestion and parking problems, if school events are added to this then there is a significant increase on limited existing resources.
4. Increased noise, a 66% increase in student numbers will result in increased student noise especially with the proposed roof top student amenities and balconies which overlook the residences of Carlow St/ Cassins Ave. With more and more people working from home, this does impinge on the ability to successfully work from home.
As a consequence:
1. I oppose the proposed expanded precinct development as it currently stands
2. I request that the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces direct that a public hearing be held in relation to this development
3. I request that independent traffic and parking surveys, analysis and modelling are prepared that go beyond just Carlow St and Cassins Ave and look at the impact of the proposed expanded precinct development on a wider area and for all stages of the proposed development and that the results are shared with local residents and any other interested parties
4. I request that as part of the traffic and parking surveys process that alternative solutions are explored
5. It should be a requirement of the proposed development that existing parking in Carlow St, Cassins Ave and Cassins Lane is retained for now and into the future as proof of the commitment of North Sydney Council to provide suitable amenities to residents and businesses in the adjacent areas, and that they believe the proposed parking solution for Marist College precinct development is adequate, no development should be approved without this
6. I request that the windows and balconies on the West elevation of the precinct development are removed to reduce noise and retain privacy for adjacent residents
7. I request that the roof top amenities of the precinct development are removed to reduce noise and retain privacy for adjacent residents

Please refer attachment

I object to the project as currently designed. Mainly to the scale and it ignoring the residential environment. If a 3d maquette or model would be created, it will be immediately obvious how much larger the proposed building is than anything in the area (rivalling the stadium). A very significant portion of the proposed building will face a largely heritage protected streetscape with many smaller 1-2 storey residences.

Why does a school need special state approval process. It is my understanding there are generous allowances for schools and spacious lots (up to 4 floors I believe).

Besides the incongruous height, the other aspectof the shape (contiguous) make the development as proposed completely anomalous in the environment where it is proposed. By using less height, setback(s) and separate buildings allowing for visual breaks, most of these concerns/objections should be addressable.

Some points that sting personally and can not go unsaid:
* why is the development positioned as a private organisation helping out the state. I.e. putting forward to provide co-ed private education. It is the state’s responsibility to provide education, not to provide opportunities or assistance to private organisations to do the same.
* why is the development positioned as a transition between cbd of north sydney and the residential of cammeray? The street the work is proposed on (Carlow) is exactly the first real residential street going north from cbd. If this reasoning stands then in years to come there will be a proposal to transition between cbd of north sydney and the residences in Northbridge, then Castlecrag, Middle Cove, etc.
* why was no dialogue sought with the people most impacted by this proposal?

Other concerns (not objections per se, i.e. apply to all/most developments) are of an implementation nature. What will be done to manage building in a residential zone (we are across the road), dust, noise, truck movements, parking, work before/after hours, etc.

I object to the development as currently proposed and to any minor edits that dont adequately address the objections. I.e. a significant other proposal would be required. I do believe a significant development addressing the desire to grow can be balanced with the mixed environment the school finds itself in. Facing stadium on Miller St and the church at the south end would be less sensitive to bulk and unbroken mass whereas the west and north side face real residential zones that deserve more consideration.

A public hearing is, in my opinion, required.

Dear Madam, Sir,

Our key objection regarding submission for Application No SSD-10473 is the underlying driver for it.
The Marist Catholic college North Sydney is planning to undertake the alterations and additions to facilitate a significant expansion of student numbers far beyond the needs of the local area.

The concept of further centralising education services in an already congested area with unequal socially access does not serve the local community or the broader community at large.
If we truly want to develop our city in a sustainable, environmentally conscious and socially just way, creating excessively equipped education service centres with economic and geographical entry barriers in the wealthy centres does not bring us closer to those goals.

The concept of campuses, closer to local communities and more accessible to a broader variety of social strata’s should be given consideration over solidifying and exacerbating social inequity and mobility and congestion challenges.

Beyond the broader undesirability of this initiative, the immediate practical issues with the proposed plans are:
• Significant increase of already congested school traffic in Ridge, West, Carlow and Miller street, initially to facilitate construction and ongoing as an additional fleet of cars on the road to ferry children to and from school, or in the best case an increased number of school buses and further public transport congestion.
• A further decoupling of local communities with their local education services as a result of excessive service centralisation (over 5 large schools within 2-3 city blocks) and prestige and economies-of-scale driven educational service providers .

Neighbourhood objections against this initiative are strong, but already the focus of some is trying to shift the burden out of their street at the cost of other surrounding streets.
Any development should be designed based on the least impact on the traffic flows overall rather than the intensity of activism by residents of a particular street.

Kind regards