Dear Sir,

I am making my submission to protest the demolition of two heritage buildings to make way for the proposed new Parramatta Powerhouse Museum.
There have been great numbers of people protesting against the closure of the Powerhouse Museum in Sydney and the argument from the Berejiklian government is that "one third of NSW's population is in western Sydney and they deserve to have an iconic institution"
Yes they certainly do.
However it does not logically follow that this desire to have a modern, new museum in Parramatta entails the destruction of 2 historic buildings in Parramatta and the dismantling of the much loved Powehouse Museum in Sydney.
Surely there are other good sites for the new museum in Parramatta and why does Sydney lose a museum so western Sydney gains one?
Isn't the object of the exercise in building a new museum to provide more museums for Sydney, to enhance the culturural amenity, not in keeping the number of museums the same?
We the voting public have not been given any valid argument for either of these proposals and in fact most queries are met with out right 'stone walling' from the Premier.
Sydney has a colourful history of 'the people' struggling to save historic precincts and their historic buildings, 'The Rocks', 'Woolloomooloo' and most sweetly an entire suburb of Paddington's terraces.
Why does it come to this?
Tourism has been a huge money generator from the preservation of these sites for the city of Sydney.
Surely history could also be used in Parramatta's favour in preserving these sites, and with a new museum to visit the cultural experience is doubly enhanced for tourists and their much needed dollars, as well as the people of Parramatta being provided with a greatly enhanced cultural amenity, with the historic buildings and their history retained.
In Parramatta the proposed site of the new museum is on the banks of a river which is subject to flooding, why is it determined to be built on this unsuitable site?
So that engineering can overcome the problems of the site at vast added expense?
What is going on?
The environmental Impact Statement now in the final week of public consultation supported the demolition of the 19th century Italianate villa Willow Grove, formerly a maternity hospital, and a row of terraces known as St George's Terrace.
Has this Impact Statement addressed the social history of these buildings adequately and the loss of connection to place?
Local commumities are being ignored and these important heritage sites are about to be destroyed.
The people of western Sydney deserve to have their heritage preserved, just as much as the people of Sydney city have deserved to have their's preserved. Everyone now enjoys the fruits of the preservation of the herirage sites in Sydney.
What would Rome, Florence, London, Paris or Melbourne be without their historic buildings?
I suspect, just as many disenchanted voters do, that we are up against a done deal involving property developers and the State government, and a relentless pursuit of redevelopment of valuble inner city sites at all costs. There seems to be no other logical explanation for all of this unnecessary distress being inflicted on the citizens of both Sydney and Parramatta.
The buildings up for destruction in Parramatta are culturally and historically significant, and a wonderful asset to the city and contain cultural memory for many citizens. They cannot be rebuilt when they are gone.
Please respect the voice of the citizens, they deserve respect.
Will this government be prepared to go down in history as cultural vandals all for the 'price of everything and the value of nothing'?
I must make note that I have not made any reportable donations to any political party

Yours sincerely
Deborah Smith

Please see attached.

I object to the proposed demolition of the heritage-listed Willow Grove and St Georges Terraces. The design of the new building should recognise the heritage value of these buildings as a constraint, rather than simply knocking them over. If the design is unable to do so, the site is not suitable and another should be selected (and there must be plenty of disused 'brownfield' sites in Parramatta to choose from). The proposed loss of these heritage buildings needs to be seen in the wider cumulative loss of heritage in Parramatta and other parts of Sydney. The current NSW government has a sorry record on heritage conservation -- for example the destruction of the Royal Oak pub in Parramatta; the ANZAC memorial avenue in Randwick for the light rail; Aboriginal heritage sites (for the same project); numerous trees and open spaces (Westconnex); early convict-built sandstone constructions (Windsor Bridge) . These heritage items were important reminders of our past history and our development as a nation, and their destruction reflects badly on the government. If the government doesn't respect our history, then what message does that send to the people? Save Willow Grove and St Georges Terraces and stop destroying our heritage.

I object to the demolishing of Willow Grove on the grounds of its historical and architectural significance.

I oppose the planned destruction of Willow Grove and St George’s Terrace. Their heritage value is considerable, and form an important part of Parramatta CBD’s history. Once lost, these physical reminders which offer people the opportunity to reflect on and experience something of Parramatta’s rich and diverse past will be gone forever. Parramatta’s future development should acknowledge, respect and build in its Indigenous history, early European settlement and 19th and 20th century background, not erase it. In principle the Powerhouse proposal has been significantly modified by the decision to retain the original site at Ultimo, and arguments that justified the destruction of heritage buildings at Parramatta must take into account the fact that the new Parramatta project is no longer the re-siting of a State significant institution. While the new design project may not have materially changed, any justification for destroying significant on-site heritage buildings based on the intent to relocate a State-significant institution is no longer valid.

I strongly object to the Parramatta Powerhouse Project.
I object on many grounds, but most significantly I am concerned and upset by the demolition of Willow Grove and St George’s Terrace for the ribbon cutting of yet another venue. These building should not be demolished because of their unique architecture (as the SoHI records – “the only examples of their type located in the core of the Parramatta CBD. The demolition of these heritage items would have a major impact on the representation of these respective architectural styles”, and most significantly because of the heritage and social impacts their demolition will have.
Willow Grove was significant for the Parramatta area and its residents during its time as a private hospital, and nursing facility. St Georges Terrace is the last remaining, and extremely important time capsule, of early history and original Parramatta building character.
I believe the demolition of these buildings is just another example of the government, and Australia more broadly, failing to maintain our interesting history where possible, in a desire to become some more modern and developed nation. But at what point do we accept we have lost what made our identity possible in the first place? Does no one consider what will be left for my generations’ children?
Furthermore, I have issues with the lack of addressed dead ends, and contradicting sentiments of the EIS and other environmental planning instruments.
Firstly, in the mitigation measure section of the report (Table 17), and many times through the report, there is reference to the importance and utilisation of ‘The City of Parramatta draft Heritage Interpretation Guidelines 2017’ and yet, I am unable to find the guidelines online or directly paraphrased in the report. Furthermore, to me, their publication after the construction of the Powerhouse Museum is completed seems pointless and seems premeditated to exclude the real considerations of development.
Secondly, the lack of tangible goals, and what seem to me to be empty promises, about re-using and salvaging parts of these existing buildings is alarming. There is no direct actions promised, and the practices mentioned seem to be novel and loose. This leads to lack of accountability in its undertaking.
Finally, the contradiction of many of the City of Parramatta’s own Council documents in this proposal is astounding. The ‘Parramatta Local Environmental Plan, 2011’, lists these buildings as having local heritage significance in Schedule 5 of the legislation, and yet they are still being openly demolished.
The EIS report mentions that this project is justifiable as it aligns with the strategic objectives of many city Plans. It apparently meets the objectives of the ‘Strategic Planning Statement City Plan 2036’. But I am unsure how demolition of some of the rarest and locally important architecture and history “balances the need for housing and economic growth, while also protecting and enhancing housing diversity, heritage and local character”. ‘Culture and Our City - A Cultural Plan for Parramatta’s CBD 2017 – 2022’ also boasts the Council’s consultation with community to find “a sense of community is very important as are our green spaces, heritage and local jobs”. Yet I would argue the Powerhouse Museum development only delivers to the locals’ priorities in the last way, and in fact totally undermines the first two. Council also want to be a ‘custodian’ and work “in partnership with cultural heritage organisations” to care for “Aboriginal history, colonial and diverse settlement history, cultural collections and cultural and natural heritage sites”. These actions don’t seem to align with this alleged role. There are many other paradoxes in this document compared to the EIS, constantly saying the Council wants to build community relations and be “a trusted partner”.
The demolition of St Georges Terrace and Willow Grove for a bigger and better facility is yet another example of this government destroying an area’s past (despite the residents of the area’s best efforts) to create the impression they are planning for a better future, while forcing the illusion that it’s for a perceived ‘greater good’, and to stand in the way of a greater good is wrong. But what is wrong is the constant empty promises of developers and the black and white nature of NSW planning system as it stands.
The loss of heritage, history and unique architecture with the demolition of Willow Grove and St George’s Terrace are reasons I stand with many residents of Parramatta to object this development.

Objection to Parramatta Powerhouse:
In light of the NSW Government's recent changes to the planned removal of the Ultimo Powerhouse to the site of WillowGrove and St. George's Terrace, I believe it is still crucial to lodge an objection against any new building(s) which will necessitate the destruction of some of Parramatta's beloved heritage buildings.

1. It is vital to the cultural history of this country to save heritage buildings such as WillowGrove and St Georges Terraces from being demolished.,
2. I have concerns about the flood risks and accessibility of the riverbank site. Recent rains demonstrated that flooding is a more regular event than the "advertised" One in One Hundred Years Flood.
3. Parramatta certainly deserves its own museum. There are many important historical sites which are under threat (The Female Factory, Old Cumberland Hospital, to name but two), which would lend themselves to development as world class museums. WillowGrove and St. George's Terrace could also be incorporated into a new museum.
4. To even hint at spending $1.5 billion to move a museum, when half of these costs are going into relocation of exhibits, storage for years while Parramatta is built and flood mitigation of the unsuitable site. When for less than half this budget Parramatta could have a purpose built museum* (*some of this text is taken from The North Parramatta Residents Action Group's helpful document).
5. The design of the new Parramatta Powerhouse is not suited for a museum, rather it appears to be an 'events' building, and therefore could still be built elsewhere in the district to perform that function. For instance, it could be paired with the new Olympic swimming pool, promised some years ago when the well used old pool was ripped up for a new football stadium. Indeed, the new Powerhouse design resembles a stadium.
Please accept my submission and I ask for the entire project to be reconsidered, in particular, saving important heritage buildings for future generations.
Regards,
Irene Wheatley

This is not the relocation of the Ultimo Power House Museum to a more suitable site, it is the destruction of a Valuable collection of historic artefacts in the name of Developer Madness.
I have resided in the Parramatta area since 1948 and my father since 1940. What we are witnessing now is Developers Madness. The site proposed for the Museum is totally unsuitable and could not meet the criteria for sensible development.
I have no affiliations with any political party nor have I made any donations to any particular political party. I don't object to having my name published in connection to this project. I am simply a concerned resident fed up with inappropriate planning decisions and destruction of historic places that make up the character of this city. My Summary of abjections is as follows.
1) Destruction of valuable heritage building such as the Terraces and Willow Grove.
2) Inappropriate Land use. This site is inappropriate for a museum of the size needed to house the existing artefacts at Ultimo
3) Flood risk. This zone is subject to flooding and with changing climate and the increased threat of higher sea and flood levels, the risk will be exacerbated.
4) The character of the area will be diminished by this eyesore.
Please re-consider this development in line with community expectations.


Neil Sheridan