PLEASE DO NOT PUBLISH MY PERSONAL DETAILS.



I have not made a reportable political donation.



SSD 17_8800 PROPOSED PARRAMATTA EELS HOTEL



a. I object to the proposed application. My concerns include:

There has been insignificant consideration to the Cumberland Hospital
site directly to the north of this area.



b. This site contains numerous buildings and sites that date back to
the earliest days of Colonial settlement. The Parramatta Gaol is the
earliest place of incarceration in Australia.

The equivalent site in Freemantle has UNESCO World Heritage listing.
It has over 200,000 visitors a year. The female factory in Tasmania
has 300,000 visitors. With this development going ahead the
opportunity of turning the Cumberland Hospital site into a major
tourist centre will be squandered due to the visual impact of an out
of proportion hotel next door.



c. The proposed height is inappropriate and visually impacts World
Heritage listed Parramatta Park and the old Government House. Further,
given the proposed scale, the proposal adversely impacts the national
heritage values for the Female Factory and jeopardises its potential
World Heritage Listing, as well as potential to extend the heritage
precinct further into the Cumberland Heritage estate. Moreover, the
Visual Impact Analysis highlights the impact the proposal will have on
the Female Factory/Cumberland Hospital site. This is totally
unacceptable. Further, I note that the massing is not well shown on
some images making it difficult for many to properly understand the
impact.



d. The proposal makes a number of assumptions that are incorrect. This
includes heights for the neighbouring heritage precincts, such as
Fleet Street, and the former Cumberland Hospital site, and includes
plans previously proposed by Urban Growth are included. Given there is
now a new master planning process underway for these precincts
following recent announcements by the government and the University of
Sydney, this may well see a reduction in the proposed height controls.
Hence to assume these assumptions are a given is misleading.



e. A Design Excellence Strategy is required to be prepared in
consultation with the Government Architect NSW. However, the Design
Review Panel's report fails to properly respond to matters pertaining
to clause 7.10(4), which significance is reinforced in case, The
Uniting Church vs Parramatta City Council [2018] NSWLEC 158,
specifically



f. The application indicates `significant consultation' has taken
place with the Park's Trust. In addition, a 'representative' needs to
be appointed as an observer on the Design Review Panel for the
project'. However, the involvement of a representative from the Trust,
should not justify the departure from the applicant meeting
requirements under local planning controls. (PLEP). Further, I am
concerned about what appears to be a perceived conflict of interest
given the Chair's previous association with the Wanderers, and current
role as Chairperson for the Manly Sea Eagles



g. The pre-lodgement community consultation process did not meet the
requirements set out in the SEARs; i.e. there was no consultation with
the major community group in the area or local residents.



In summary, the application is not in the public interest and should
be rejected.



Please keep me informed about this application.

PARRAMATTA LEAGUES CLUB

I am writing on behalf of the National Trust (NSW) Parramatta Regional
Branch to oppose the Parramatta Leagues Club application at 17 - 19
O'Connell Street, Parramatta for several reasons. These reasons can be
summarised as: the proposed development being too tall;
inappropriately located; and having unacceptable heritage impacts on
important heritage items in the vicinity of the site.

First, and while I acknowledge that the Minister for Planning and
Development has "called in" the application, I find it difficult to
accept that the criterion for such a classification have been
satisfied given the examples of State Significant Development (SSD),
such as "large-scale transport" etc. It was my understanding that SSD
applications relate only to developments that provide a broad public
benefit, rather than private developments that provide private
benefits to those undertaking the development and, in this case,
peripheral benefits for tourists or more likely, locals attending a
football match nearby.

Second, it is not clear whether the owner of the site has given
permission for the application to be lodged. My belief is that the
site is under the control of the Parramatta Park Trust. I am not aware
that the Trust has given approval for the application to be lodged and
in their correspondence raise several matters that require
consideration. I am not satisfied that these matters, that focus on
the impact on the heritage significance of Parramatta Park, are
acceptably addressed in the documentation supplied with the
application.

Third, the proposed height is excessive for its context. Any reliance
on the Parramatta Stadium as a guide for assessing height is misplaced
and out of touch with heritage context of Old Government House and the
Female Factory and ancillary buildings. No decision should be made
until the new master planning process is complete and has been
considered, understood and accepted by the community. The absence of
any maximum height and floor space controls under the councils current
planning controls should not be an invitation to erect an
unsympathetic building in one of Australia's most significant heritage
precincts.

Fourth, the land forms part of the historic Parramatta Park precinct
and the continual excising of parts of the park continue to diminish
its undoubted heritage significance for all Australians. The World
Heritage listing continues to be threatened by unsympathetic
development around its periphery. There is no valid reason to locate a
hotel in this location except the selfish motives of Parramatta
Leagues Club to realise a financial benefit for themselves. A hotel
would be more appropriately located in the Parramatta CBD where
greater access is available to a wider range of services offered in
Parramatta.

To who it may concern



I note that I have not made a reportable political donation.



SSD 17_8800 PROPOSED PARRAMATTA EELS HOTEL



I vehemently object to the proposed application. My concerns include:



* The proposed height is inappropriate and visually impacts World
Heritage listed Parramatta Park and the old Government House. Further,
given the proposed scale, the proposal adversely impacts the national
heritage values for the Female Factory and jeopardises its potential
World Heritage Listing, as well as potential to extend the heritage
precinct further into the Cumberland Heritage estate. Moreover, the
Visual Impact Analysis highlights the impact the proposal will have on
the Female Factory/Cumberland Hospital site. This is totally
unacceptable. Further, I note that the massing is not well shown on
some images making it difficult for many to properly understand the
impact.

- it will a blight on the Parramatta landscape and the area has plenty
of hotels and high rises in adjacent areas (walking distance) that are
available for such use. The building of such a structure makes a
laughing stock of our local area and undermines it's heritage history.

* The proposal makes a number of assumptions that are incorrect. This
includes heights for the neighbouring heritage precincts, such as
Fleet Street, and the former Cumberland Hospital site, and includes
plans previously proposed by Urban Growth are included. Given there is
now a new master planning process underway for these precincts
following recent announcements by the government and the University of
Sydney, this may well see a reduction in the proposed height controls.
Hence to assume these assumptions are a given is misleading.

* A Design Excellence Strategy is required to be prepared in
consultation with the Government Architect NSW. However, the Design
Review Panel's report fails to properly respond to matters pertaining
to clause 7.10(4), which significance is reinforced in case, The
Uniting Church vs Parramatta City Council [2018] NSWLEC 158,
specifically

* The application indicates `significant consultation' has taken place
with the Park's Trust. In addition, a 'representative' needs to be
appointed as an observer on the Design Review Panel for the project'.
However, the involvement of a representative from the Trust, should
not justify the departure from the applicant meeting requirements
under local planning controls. (PLEP). Further, I am concerned about
what appears to be a perceived conflict of interest given the Chair's
previous association with the Wanderers, and current role as
Chairperson for the Manly Sea Eagles.

* The pre-lodgement community consultation process did not meet the
requirements set out in the SEARs; i.e. there was no consultation with
the major community group in the area or local residents.



In summary, the application is not in the public interest and should
be rejected. As a local I am outraged that we are sacrificing what
makes Parramatta great (our heritage) in the name of greed.



Please keep me informed about this application.

> PLEASE DO NOT PUBLISH MY PERSONAL DETAILS.
>
>
>
> I have not made a reportable political donation.
>
>
>
> SSD 17_8800 PROPOSED PARRAMATTA EELS HOTEL
>
>
>
> Another example of greed over community benefit.
>
>
>
> I object to the proposed application. My concerns include:
>
>
>
> * The proposed height is inappropriate and visually impacts World
Heritage listed Parramatta Park and the old Government House. Further,
given the proposed scale, the proposal adversely impacts the national
heritage values for the Female Factory and jeopardises its potential
World Heritage Listing, as well as potential to extend the heritage
precinct further into the Cumberland Heritage estate. Moreover, the
Visual Impact Analysis highlights the impact the proposal will have on
the Female Factory/Cumberland Hospital site. This is totally
unacceptable. Further, I note that the massing is not well shown on
some images making it difficult for many to properly understand the
impact.
>
> * The proposal makes a number of assumptions that are incorrect.
This includes heights for the neighbouring heritage precincts, such as
Fleet Street, and the former Cumberland Hospital site, and includes
plans previously proposed by Urban Growth are included. Given there is
now a new master planning process underway for these precincts
following recent announcements by the government and the University of
Sydney, this may well see a reduction in the proposed height controls.
Hence to assume these assumptions are a given is misleading.
>
> * A Design Excellence Strategy is required to be prepared in
consultation with the Government Architect NSW. However, the Design
Review Panel's report fails to properly respond to matters pertaining
to clause 7.10(4), which significance is reinforced in case, The
Uniting Church vs Parramatta City Council [2018] NSWLEC 158,
specifically
>
> * The application indicates `significant consultation' has taken
place with the Park's Trust. In addition, a 'representative' needs to
be appointed as an observer on the Design Review Panel for the
project'. However, the involvement of a representative from the Trust,
should not justify the departure from the applicant meeting
requirements under local planning controls. (PLEP). Further, I am
concerned about what appears to be a perceived conflict of interest
given the Chair's previous association with the Wanderers, and current
role as Chairperson for the Manly Sea Eagles.
>
> * The pre-lodgement community consultation process did not meet the
requirements set out in the SEARs; i.e. there was no consultation with
the major community group in the area or local residents.
>
>
>
> In summary, the application is not in the public interest and should
be rejected.
>
>
>
> Please keep me informed about this application.

PLEASE DO NOT PUBLISH MY PERSONAL DETAILS.



I have not made a reportable political donation.



SSD 17_8800 PROPOSED PARRAMATTA EELS HOTEL



I object to the proposed application. My concerns include:



* The proposed height is inappropriate and visually impacts World
Heritage listed Parramatta Park and the old Government House. Further,
given the proposed scale, the proposal adversely impacts the national
heritage values for the Female Factory and jeopardises its potential
World Heritage Listing, as well as potential to extend the heritage
precinct further into the Cumberland Heritage estate. Moreover, the
Visual Impact Analysis highlights the impact the proposal will have on
the Female Factory/Cumberland Hospital site. This is totally
unacceptable. Further, I note that the massing is not well shown on
some images making it difficult for many to properly understand the
impact.

* The proposal makes a number of assumptions that are incorrect. This
includes heights for the neighbouring heritage precincts, such as
Fleet Street, and the former Cumberland Hospital site, and includes
plans previously proposed by Urban Growth are included. Given there is
now a new master planning process underway for these precincts
following recent announcements by the government and the University of
Sydney, this may well see a reduction in the proposed height controls.
Hence to assume these assumptions are a given is misleading.

* A Design Excellence Strategy is required to be prepared in
consultation with the Government Architect NSW. However, the Design
Review Panel's report fails to properly respond to matters pertaining
to clause 7.10(4), which significance is reinforced in case, The
Uniting Church vs Parramatta City Council [2018] NSWLEC 158,
specifically

* The application indicates `significant consultation' has taken place
with the Park's Trust. In addition, a 'representative' needs to be
appointed as an observer on the Design Review Panel for the project'.
However, the involvement of a representative from the Trust, should
not justify the departure from the applicant meeting requirements
under local planning controls. (PLEP). Further, I am concerned about
what appears to be a perceived conflict of interest given the Chair's
previous association with the Wanderers, and current role as
Chairperson for the Manly Sea Eagles.

* The pre-lodgement community consultation process did not meet the
requirements set out in the SEARs; i.e. there was no consultation with
the major community group in the area or local residents.



I live within a few blocks of the proposal, and am a frequent user of
Parramatta Park. I have already been impacted by the removal of the
community swimming pool. Turning this significant section of
Parramatta Park into a "sport's fans haven", to the detriment of all
the other users of the Park, is something that should not be allowed
to happen.



In summary, the application is not in the public interest and should
be rejected.



Please keep me informed about this application.

My objection is on the basis of excessive height (62m), on Public
land,Heritage,Traffic interference on O'Connell St, Economic loss for
existing CBD hotels, Levels of Service (LoS) at Victoria/O'Connell St
junction.
1.Excessive height gives economic advantage to privileged few with
overview of nearby Stadium events.
2. Little Coogee Walk view (GWP1018) view above treeline.
3. Parramatta Park Trust's letter 6Nov2017 issues and Assessment
response 5.2.7 against Policy 8.2.1 and 8.2.1.4 are dismissive as
minor but not detrimental impact being one sided and do in fact cause
harm to others.It is NOT outside the Park as stated.
4.Driveway access proposed (opp.Ross St) DWg.0102 Site Plan affects
curtilage of Ross St Gatehouse.110m south of Grose St /Eels Place
intersection, Leagues Club bus stop.
Outbound Construction and Bus swept path (1830SCAD007 Fig.3) Coach and
delivery vehicles will effect free flow in both northbound lanes in
O'Connell . Should be directed to exit signalised Eels Place.
5.What account has been taken in Intersection Operating conditions of
the effect of Light Rail closure of Church St to southbound vehicles
and diversion to Victoria Rd/O'Connell already at LoS D and E (Table
4.6) and possibility of additional loading of local road system at
site 101 O'Connell/Grose?

PLEASE DO NOT PUBLISH MY PERSONAL DETAILS.

I have not made a reportable political donation.

SSD 17_8800 PROPOSED PARRAMATTA EELS HOTEL

I object to the proposed application. My concerns include:
Parramatta Leagues Club Hotel will encourage more people to gamble and
allow gambling addicts to spend even more time and money on the poker
machines, all of which is ag asinst community interests

* The proposed height is inappropriate and visually impacts World
Heritage listed Parramatta Park and the old Government House. Further,
given the proposed scale, the proposal adversely impacts the national
heritage values for the Female Factory and jeopardises its potential
World Heritage Listing, as well as potential to extend the heritage
precinct further into the Cumberland Heritage estate. Moreover, the
Visual Impact Analysis highlights the impact the proposal will have on
the Female Factory/Cumberland Hospital site. This is totally
unacceptable. Further, I note that the massing is not well shown on
some images making it difficult for many to properly understand the
impact.
* The proposal makes a number of assumptions that are incorrect. This
includes heights for the neighbouring heritage precincts, such as
Fleet Street, and the former Cumberland Hospital site, and includes
plans previously proposed by Urban Growth are included. Given there is
now a new master planning process underway for these precincts
following recent announcements by the government and the University of
Sydney, this may well see a reduction in the proposed height controls.
Hence to assume these assumptions are a given is misleading.
* A Design Excellence Strategy is required to be prepared in
consultation with the Government Architect NSW. However, the Design
Review Panel's report fails to properly respond to matters pertaining
to clause 7.10(4), which significance is reinforced in case, The
Uniting Church vs Parramatta City Council [2018] NSWLEC 158,
specifically
* The application indicates `significant consultation' has taken place
with the Park's Trust. In addition, a 'representative' needs to be
appointed as an observer on the Design Review Panel for the project'.
However, the involvement of a representative from the Trust, should
not justify the departure from the applicant meeting requirements
under local planning controls. (PLEP). Further, I am concerned about
what appears to be a perceived conflict of interest given the Chair's
previous association with the Wanderers, and current role as
Chairperson for the Manly Sea Eagles.
* The pre-lodgement community consultation process did not meet the
requirements set out in the SEARs; i.e. there was no consultation with
the major community group in the area or local residents.

In summary, the application is not in the public interest and should
be rejected.

Please keep me informed about this application.

PLEASE DO NOT PUBLISH MY PERSONAL DETAILS.

I have not made a reportable political donation.

SSD 17_8800 PROPOSED PARRAMATTA EELS HOTEL

I object to the proposed application. My concerns include:

* The proposed height is inappropriate and visually impacts World
Heritage listed Parramatta Park and the old Government House. Further,
given the proposed scale, the proposal adversely impacts the national
heritage values for the Female Factory and jeopardises its potential
World Heritage Listing, as well as potential to extend the heritage
precinct further into the Cumberland Heritage estate. Moreover, the
Visual Impact Analysis highlights the impact the proposal will have on
the Female Factory/Cumberland Hospital site. This is totally
unacceptable. Further, I note that the massing is not well shown on
some images making it difficult for many to properly understand the
impact.

* A Design Excellence Strategy is required to be prepared in
consultation with the Government Architect NSW. However, the Design
Review Panel's report fails to properly respond to matters pertaining
to clause 7.10(4), which significance is reinforced in case, The
Uniting Church vs Parramatta City Council [2018] NSWLEC 158,
specifically
* The application indicates `significant consultation' has taken place
with the Park's Trust. In addition, a 'representative' needs to be
appointed as an observer on the Design Review Panel for the project'.
However, the involvement of a representative from the Trust, should
not justify the departure from the applicant meeting requirements
under local planning controls. (PLEP). Further, I am concerned about
what appears to be a perceived conflict of interest given the Chair's
previous association with the Wanderers, and current role as
Chairperson for the Manly Sea Eagles.
* The pre-lodgement community consultation process did not meet the
requirements set out in the SEARs; i.e. there was no consultation with
the major community group in the area or local residents.

In summary, the application is not in the public interest and should
be rejected.

Please keep me informed about this application.

PLEASE DO NOT PUBLISH MY PERSONAL DETAILS.

I have not made a reportable political donation.

SSD 17_8800 PROPOSED PARRAMATTA EELS HOTEL

To whom it may concern,

The proposed development by Parramatta Leagues Club is another example
of how heritage in Western Sydney is being ignored and the heritage
value of Parramatta park and the Fleet Street precinct in particular.
If this club wants a hotel then another location or a more sympathetic
design should be sought.
I object to the proposed application. My concerns include:

* The proposed height is inappropriate and visually impacts World
Heritage listed Parramatta Park and the old Government House. Further,
given the proposed scale, the proposal adversely impacts the national
heritage values for the Female Factory and jeopardises its potential
World Heritage Listing, as well as potential to extend the heritage
precinct further into the Cumberland Heritage estate. Moreover, the
Visual Impact Analysis highlights the impact the proposal will have on
the Female Factory/Cumberland Hospital site. This is totally
unacceptable. Further, I note that the massing is not well shown on
some images making it difficult for many to properly understand the
impact.
* The proposal makes a number of assumptions that are incorrect. This
includes heights for the neighbouring heritage precincts, such as
Fleet Street, and the former Cumberland Hospital site, and includes
plans previously proposed by Urban Growth are included. Given there is
now a new master planning process underway for these precincts
following recent announcements by the government and the University of
Sydney, this may well see a reduction in the proposed height controls.
Hence to assume these assumptions are a given is misleading.
* A Design Excellence Strategy is required to be prepared in
consultation with the Government Architect NSW. However, the Design
Review Panel's report fails to properly respond to matters pertaining
to clause 7.10(4), which significance is reinforced in case, The
Uniting Church vs Parramatta City Council [2018] NSWLEC 158,
specifically
* The application indicates `significant consultation' has taken place
with the Park's Trust. In addition, a 'representative' needs to be
appointed as an observer on the Design Review Panel for the project'.
However, the involvement of a representative from the Trust, should
not justify the departure from the applicant meeting requirements
under local planning controls. (PLEP). Further, I am concerned about
what appears to be a perceived conflict of interest given the Chair's
previous association with the Wanderers, and current role as
Chairperson for the Manly Sea Eagles.
* The pre-lodgement community consultation process did not meet the
requirements set out in the SEARs; i.e. there was no consultation with
the major community group in the area or local residents.

In summary, the application is not in the public interest and should
be rejected. This is just one more example of the undervaluing of
heritage in the western suburbs.

Please keep me informed about this application.

PLEASE DO NOT PUBLISH MY PERSONAL DETAILS.

I have not made a reportable political donation.

SSD 17_8800 PROPOSED PARRAMATTA EELS HOTEL

I object to the proposed application. My concerns include:

* The proposed height is inappropriate and visually impacts World
Heritage listed Parramatta Park and the old Government House. Further,
given the proposed scale, the proposal adversely impacts the national
heritage values for the Female Factory and jeopardises its potential
World Heritage Listing, as well as potential to extend the heritage
precinct further into the Cumberland Heritage estate. Moreover, the
Visual Impact Analysis highlights the impact the proposal will have on
the Female Factory/Cumberland Hospital site. This is totally
unacceptable. Further, I note that the massing is not well shown on
some images making it difficult for many to properly understand the
impact.
* The proposal makes a number of assumptions that are incorrect. This
includes heights for the neighbouring heritage precincts, such as
Fleet Street, and the former Cumberland Hospital site, and includes
plans previously proposed by Urban Growth are included. Given there is
now a new master planning process underway for these precincts
following recent announcements by the government and the University of
Sydney, this may well see a reduction in the proposed height controls.
Assuming these assumptions are a given is misleading.
* A Design Excellence Strategy is required to be prepared in
consultation with the Government Architect NSW. However, the Design
Review Panel's report fails to properly respond to matters pertaining
to clause 7.10(4), which significance is reinforced in case, The
Uniting Church vs Parramatta City Council [2018] NSWLEC 158,
specifically
* The application indicates `significant consultation' has taken place
with the Park's Trust. In addition, a 'representative' needs to be
appointed as an observer on the Design Review Panel for the project'.
However, the involvement of a representative from the Trust, should
not justify the departure of the applicant from meeting requirements
under local planning controls. (PLEP). Further, I am concerned about
what appears to be a conflict of interest, given the Chair's previous
association with the Wanderers, and current role as Chairperson for
the Manly Sea Eagles.
* The pre-lodgement community consultation process did not meet the
requirements set out in the SEARs; i.e. there was no consultation with
the major community groups in the area or local residents.

In summary, the application is not in the public interest nor in the
interest of the well-being of Parramatta Park and should be rejected.

Please keep me informed about this application.