LACK OF RATIONALE FOR RE-DEVELOPMENT
The proposed Masterplan does not make the case that the significant
development is necessary, merely desirable.

The proposed new "early learning/child day care" use at the site with
90 proposed "student" places is a clear breach of the existing cap of
942 students by the school. A 10% increase in early learning/day care
places at the site will have a significant impact on the existing
traffic and parking congestion issues experienced by residents.
Parents of these children not walk nor use public transport and will
therefore have a higher car usage rate than for the parents of the
other school students. None of these issues are considered in the
Masterplan.

DESTRUCTION OF HERITAGE
The plan involves the demolition of a number of heritage items,
without any regard for their importance to the wider community. Some
of those buildings are over 100 years old. The buildings in question
are all in good order, and contribute to the heritage character of the
area. There has been no robust assessment of whether the proposed
demolition, and the significant loss of our heritage, is justified. To
allow this demolition to proceed would be inconsistent with the clear
principles established by the Land and Environment Court.

Wilkinson House is set for immediate demolition as the first step in
SCEGGS over-development. The building was designed by the renowned
architect Emil Sodersten and makes a highly significant visual
contribution to the heritage streetscape of this section of Forbes
Street. No changes to the facades of this building should be permitted
in order to retain the existing heritage character of this section of
Forbes Street. There is no evidence of architectural attempts to adapt
the building for re-use. The starting point of this application is
that the heritage buildings should be demolished and replaced with a
boring modern building that suits SCEGGS only and no one else.

There are excellent examples of adaptive reuse across the world,
including in Sydney. Why have these not been explored? To think that
an education institution chooses the lowest option to simply destroy
and rebuild sends a terrible example to its students.

The existing 1830's John Verge designed 'Barham' which is located
within the school site only has limited public views available from
the Forbes Street. The proposed Masterplan will further reduce these
public views by constructing an inappropriate modern building on the
Forbes Street side of the Barham building, which will then effectively
block all meaningful public views of the historic building from the
Forbes Street and overwhelm the historically important house.

The significant and unjustified heritage impacts of this proposal mean
that the project is inconsistent with the objectives of the heritage
provisions in clause 5.10 of the Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2012.
Far from ensuring the conservation of our heritage, this proposal will
completely demolish the entire, beautifully preserved fabric of
significant items within the school and will also have a significant
and unacceptable impact on nearby items outside the school, as well as
on the surrounding heritage conservation zone.

LOSS OF VIEWS
The height of the proposed new Multipurpose Building is approximately
2.8 metres higher than the existing Old Gym Building with the inherent
loss of views and light. Some residents in Forbes Street and Liverpool
Street will lose entirely their iconic Harbour Bridge views. Others
will lose their city views, including of the Anzac monument in Hyde
Park and of the Centrepoint tower. None of these impacts have been
properly assessed and justified in accordance with the `view sharing'
principles outlined by Land and Environment Court planning principles.
The statutory non-compliance with height limits immediately indicates
that the significant view loss impacts are unacceptable, if the
relevant Court precedents are correctly applied.

Does an education institution want to lead its students by example and
destroy the amenity of its neighbours?

OVERSHADOWING
The 19th century terraces at the end of Thomson Street will lose all
northern light and some western light. They will be completely in
shadow.

BULK
The proposed 7 storey multifunction building is too high and not set
back from the existing two storey 19th century terraces that are
adjacent to the building on both Thomson and Bourke Streets. The bulk
and scale of the building is inappropriate for context of the
surrounding heritage conservation zone. The non-compliance with the
LEP is not justified in the circumstances.

INAPPROPRIATE CONSULTATION
The school has never held one meeting where all stakeholders have been
present to hear concerns of others. Consultation should have occurred
when the DA was lodged, not months prior. The school has carefully
designed the process to avoid opposition to its plans. Where they have
documented consultations, they have actively misrepresented the
discussions, for example, East Sydney Neighbourhood Association (ESNA)
were never "indifferent' to the proposed demolition of the historic
Wilkinson House. The consultation process is illegitimate and does not
comply with reasonable expectations of public participation.

I object on the following grounds:

1. Demolition of Wilkinson House - loss of a significant local
heritage item, impact on the Heritage Conservation Area and impact on
the streetscape;
2. Failure of Master Plan and address current significant traffic
management issues;
3. Inadequacy of the Traffic Report included in the submission;
4. Query in relation to the stated Capital Investment Value, which is
just under the level at which a Design Competition is required;
5. Ambiguity in the application regarding the Early Education and Care
Facility for 90 children and the impacts arising;
6. Impact of staging and construction.

The concerns include:
* Demolition of Wilkinson House - loss of a significant local heritage
item, impact on the Heritage Conservation Area and impact on the
streetscape;
* Failure of Master Plan and address current significant traffic
management issues;
* Inadequacy of the Traffic Report included in the submission;
* Query in relation to the stated Capital Investment Value, which is
just under the level at which a Design Competition is required;
* Ambiguity in the application regarding the Early Education and Care
Facility for 90 children and the impacts arising;
* Impact of staging and construction.

I live in the Horizon Building> I wish to object to the proposed
development by SCEGGS.

I strongly support the retention of Wilkinson House and am concerned
that existing issues with traffic congestion and safety and future
Traffic Management issues have not been adequately addressed.

The Traffic report is inadequate.

The application is ambiguous in relation to the application for the
Early Childcare Centre and accompanying reports not addressing the
impacts of this inclusion.

I object to any to increase in student numbers on the site through the
inclusion of an early childcare centre. This would have significant
impact arising from increased traffic.

I also am concerned regarding reduction in carparking spaces in Forbes
Street.

Issues raised in the consultation were not taken into account in the
Masterplan, particularly in relation to how existing traffic problems,
congestion and safety can be really improved.

I object on the following grounds:

1. Demolition of Wilkinson House - loss of a significant local
heritage item, impact on the Heritage Conservation Area and impact on
the streetscape;
2. Failure of Master Plan and address current significant traffic
management issues;
3. Inadequacy of the Traffic Report included in the submission;
4. Query in relation to the stated Capital Investment Value, which is
just under the level at which a Design Competition is required;
5. Ambiguity in the application regarding the Early Education and Care
Facility for 90 children and the impacts arising;
6. Impact of staging and construction.

I wish to Object to the proposed development by SCEGGS.

I strongly support the retention of Wilkinson House and am concerned
that existing issues with traffic congestion and safety and future
Traffic Management issues have not been adequately addressed.


I am also very concerned about any proposal that seeks to increase
student numbers on the site through the inclusion of an early
childcare centre. This would have significant impact arising from
increased traffic.

I also am concerned regarding reduction in carparking spaces in Forbes
Street.

LACK OF RATIONALE FOR RE-DEVELOPMENT

The proposed Masterplan does not make the case that the significant
development is necessary, with all the inherent constructions risks,
demolition of heritage properties and inconvenience to the
neighbourhood.

The proposed new "early learning/child day care" use at the site with
90 proposed "student" places is a clear breach of the existing cap of
942 students by the school. These additional early learning/day care
places at the site will actually have a greater per student impact on
the already significant school traffic and parking congestion on the
local streets surrounding the site as the parents of these children
will be even less likely to walk or use public transport and will
therefore have a higher car usage rate than for the parents of the
other school students. None of these issues are considered in the
Masterplan.

LOSS OF VIEWS
The height of the proposed new Multipurpose Building is approximately
2.8 metres higher than the existing Old Gym Building with the inherent
loss of views and light. Some residents in Forbes Street and Liverpool
Street will lose entirely their iconic Harbour Bridge views. Others
will lose their city views, including of the CentrePoint tower. None
of these impacts have been properly assessed and justified in
accordance with the `view sharing' principles outlined by Land and
Environment Court planning principles. The statutory non-compliance
with height limits immediately indicates that the significant view
loss impacts are unacceptable, if the relevant Court precedents are
correctly applied.

OVERSHADOWING
The 19th century terraces at the end of Thomson Street will lose all
northern light and some western light. They will be completely in
shadow.

BULK
The proposed 7 storey multifunction building is too high and not set
back from the existing two storey 19th century terraces that are
adjacent to the building on both Thomson and Bourke Streets. The bulk
and scale of the building is inappropriate for context of the
surrounding heritage conservation zone. The non-compliance with the
LEP is not justified in the circumstances.

I wish to object to the proposed development 165-215 Forbes Street,
159-163 Forbes Street, 224-226 Bourke Street, 217 Forbes Street.

In particular I refer to the Demolition of Wilkinson House which would
represent the loss of a significant local heritage item, impact on the
Heritage Conservation Area and impact on the streetscape. My apartment
looks directly onto Wilkinson House, and its heritage status was a
significant consideration in my decision to purchase the apartment. I
work from home, and in addition to the loss of aesthetic amenity, the
hideous noise and traffic chaos that would arise from an extended
period of construction would significantly impact on my personal
amenity.

I also refer to the Failure of Master Plan and address current
significant traffic management issues; and Inadequacy of the Traffic
Report included in the submission;

I query in relation to the stated Capital Investment Value, which is
just under the level at which a Design Competition is required;

Having managed various Early Education and Care Facilities in the
period 1994 - 2018 I find considerable ambiguity in the application
regarding the Early Education and Care Facility for 90 children and
the impacts arising which in my experience are always significant.

With respect to the impact of staging and construction, this would
appear to be a never ending project, certainly with respect to my
remaining lifetime.

Please record my objection to this proposed development.

I OBJECT TO SCEGGS development application currently before NSW Planning.
DESTRUCTION OF HERITAGE

The plan involves the demolition of a number of heritage items,
without any regard for their importance to the wider community. Some
of those buildings are over 100 years old. The buildings in question
are all in good order, and contribute to the heritage character of the
area. Given the comments above about the need for the project, and
that the specific future school uses of the proposed new building
envelopes remains unclear, there has been no robust assessment of
whether the proposed demolition, and the significant loss of our
heritage, is justified. To allow this demolition to proceed would be
inconsistent with the clear principles established by the Land and
Environment Court.
The proposed 7 storey multifunction building is too high and not set
back from the existing two storey 19th century terraces that are
adjacent to the building on both Thomson and Bourke Streets. The bulk
and scale of the building is inappropriate for context of the
surrounding heritage conservation zone. The non-compliance with the
LEP is not justified in the circumstances.

My concerns relate to the Demolition of Wilkinson House because of it's
historical,aesthetic and social value.
Traffic problems which we face already on a daily basis and which will
be ex acerbated by building work,the continued use of buses which
double park in Forbes Street and the attitude of the school parents
who flagrantly flout traffic rules hen dropping and picking up their
children
The impact of construction and the ambiguity within the concept
application.The other cause for concern is whether the provisions of
the competitive design process have been complied with pursuant to
SLEP 2012