Issue: Construction Management

Detail: The EIS lacks sufficient detail regarding the proposed mitigation measures that will be implemented during construction to ensure minimal impact to the school students, teachers and surrounding natural environment. The lack of detail makes it very difficult to have any certainty that key construction impacts - such as noise, dust, air quality, soil and water management, construction traffic etc - will be effectively managed during the proposed 18 month - 2 year construction timeframe.

The EIS notes that further detailed management plans will be developed by the construction contractor, however there is no assurance regarding the adequacy of these documents, their implementation, or revision when required in response to incidents and non compliances. Further, the EIS notes that these management plans will be sent to Northern Beaches Council, which is incorrect, as the Department is the determining authority. It is assumed that management plans may be issued to a Principal Certifying Authority, as is the case on other similar projects.

Request: Could the Department please consider conditioning the project so that key environmental management matters and their associated management plans that fall outside the expertise of the Principal Certifying Authority be issued to the Department for review and approval prior to the commencement of the relevant phase of works. Given the extensive nature and scale of the proposal within an operating school of over 900 students, and on a highly constrained site, these could include as a minimum Noise and Vibration, Air Quality, and Construction Traffic Management.

In addition, given the size and scale of the project, the length of the construction period, the highly constrained site, where students and teachers will continue to work and learn adjacent to a major construction site, could the Department please consider conditioning the project with an Independent Environmental Representative as is the case on other large construction projects. The EIS provides no certainty nor commitment regarding the management of key environmental matters. Conditioning the appropriate and detailed management of these matters to a high standard will be the only way that the school community can be assured of appropriate environmental management controls and student wellbeing and safety during the extensive construction period.

Issue: Hours of work

Detail: The EIS states that the hours of work for the proposed development will be 7am - 5pm Monday to Friday and 8am - 1pm on Saturdays. Given that the development works will be undertaken within the grounds of the school where in excess of 900 students and 65 teaching staff will continue to work, learn, and play, its seems prudent to work as much as possible outside the standard school hours. This may assist in reducing the construction timeframe, which is shown as being up to 2 years.

Request: Could the Department please seek clarification from DoE regarding why extended working hours are not being sought as a means to minimise impact upon the students and teaching staff. Extended working hours on Saturdays and scheduling significant works during school holidays should be prioritised to minimise the impact on students.
Issue: Construction Traffic

Detail: The Construction Traffic Management information provided in the EIS is very brief and fails to identify the significant peak in pedestrian and traffic movements in and around the school during the school drop off and pick up times. The EIS focusses on public safety, rather than student safety. With over 900 students arriving and departing school during these times there is a significant volume of vehicle and pedestrian traffic. As this is a primary school, many students are brought to school by their parents with younger siblings, which adds to the traffic and pedestrian volumes significantly.

Request: Could the Department please consider requesting detailed pedestrian and traffic management plans and traffic control plans that clearly identify accurate pedestrian and traffic volumes during peak times and genuine measures to ensure public and student safety, particularly where construction traffic interfaces with the school. All construction entrances to the school should be permanently manned during working hours with an RMS accredited traffic controller, as is standard practice on other large construction sites.

Issue: General Construction Management - runoff to lagoon and beach

Detail: The EIS does not provide adequate information regarding how soil and water will be managed on site to ensure no runoff to the nearby Curl Curl Lagoon and North Curl Curl Beach. These are sensitive ecosystems that provide habitat to many protected flora and fauna species.

Request: Could the Department please consider requiring the preparation of a detailed Soil and Water Management plan, to be prepared in accordance with relevant standards to the satisfaction of the Department. This management plan should require no discharge off site.

Issue: Incident management

Detail: The EIS provides no detail regarding how incidents will be managed on site. This is of concern, as the construction of the new school will be undertaken within the grounds of the existing school whilst it is in operation. As such, any environmental or safety incident, if not appropriately managed, has the potential to adversely impact upon the health, wellbeing and safety of students, teachers and the natural environment.

The EIS notes that asbestos will be removed from site, however no assurance regarding asbestos management procedures is given. It is assumed that the construction works will involve the use of fuels, chemicals, concrete etc, and again, no information nor assurance is provided as to how works will be undertaken to ensure the appropriate management of any incidents on site, should they occur.

Request: Could the Department please condition the management and reporting of incidents during construction
Issue: Proposed Futsal Courts

Detail: The EIS (Landscape Master plan) states that two synthetic turf Futsal courts will be built on the northern part of the site. The DoE have advised that it is intended that the school can hire these facilities out to raise funds. However, the proposed courts are to be constructed on an existing slope making them unlikely to be user friendly, safe, or likely to be hired out.

Request: Could the Department please consider requiring through a condition of approval that the futsal courts, and other proposed sporting facilities within the school (eg handball courts etc), be constructed so that they are on a flat grade making them effective and usable facilities. These are unlikely to be facilities that the school can use effectively if they are constructed on a slope. Given the size and scale of the proposed works, there is no valid reason why the facilities cannot be constructed at grade so that they are appropriate for use.

Issue: Air Conditioning

Detail: The proposal does not provide for any mechanical ventilation (heating or cooling) of the new buildings. This is likely to result in the buildings/ classrooms being unusable during the hot summer and cold winter times. The newly constructed buildings (2016) at Harbord Public School were also built without mechanical ventilation, and as a result, on hot days they are unable to be used. Children and teachers share use of the older style buildings with existing air conditioning on hot days.

Request: Could the Department please request further justification from DoE as to how the new class rooms will be able to achieve and maintain a constant and suitable temperature conducive to learning, particularly during the hotter and colder times of the year. Could the Department please consider requiring that the design include mechanical ventilation.

With more extreme weather events forecast over the next 50 years, its seems short sighted to build a state of the art education facility that does not facilitate a sound learning environment. Currently at Curl Curl North Public School, on hot days, children and teachers in classrooms without air conditioning move to classrooms with air conditioning and share the working space. As this is already an issue for the school, it is disappointing that the new school class rooms will not provide any heating or cooling, and this is likely to be a significant issue for students in the future and a barrier for learning.

I would like to see some of Curl Curl North Public School to retain at least one cottage retained for the History of the School.

What year was the School Built and when was the School opened??

I object to losing all the History and the weather board Classrooms as these have character.

As a parent of 3 kids who have attended the school (oldest now aged 18, youngest 9) I have always loved the character and personality of the school. Most of that comes from the charming old buildings. The school has an unpretentious history which reflects the suburb perfectly and the students and teachers all operate in a culture that is friendly and inclusive. Look around and you will see many aspects of the school have been built by parents at working bees. Or that have been built using money raised by departing year 6 classes or from fundraising efforts from the P&C.

The history isn't the only thing you will destroy if you demolish all the old buildings. If the government comes in and spends 17 million dollars on the school, you will also kill off any of that community involvement, for it will be hard to ask people to put their hand in their pocket to help out the school when it has just splashed that kind of money around.

The school doesn't need to be totally demolished, just improved. The word on the street is that the decision is being made by people who don't live in the area and is more of a political one. A shame really because, yes we will have a shiny new school, but it will be a while before it develops a healthy community based culture like we already have and we will have totally lost any links to the past

I am writing to express concern and disappointment in learning that the historic weatherboard buildings which are part of Curl Curl North Public School will be completely demolished as part of the redevelopment proposal.
These buildings are a much loved part of the school and it is such a shame to completely obliterate them.
While accepting that any new development will benefit the children and the local community, an appreciation of the past and a love for heritage should count towards retaining these buildings, evidence of that history.
Please consider retaining the weatherboard cottage classrooms.

I am strongly opposed to the complete demolition of all the historic buildings.

While those `historic buildings' are 50's weatherboard and have not been heritage listed they are part of the history of North Curl Curl and many people are attached to their charm.

It's the loss of heritage and character that has many parents and teachers upset. The small row of old classrooms with their lovely verandas are currently the heart and soul of the school and surely could have a purpose.

My son in year 3 last term studied Curl Curl History. Being a suburb that is traditionally weatherboard and fibro cottages, there are not many buildings left that reflect that history.
If these weatherboard buildings go there will be virtually none.

Surely a good architect can deliver a school of the future while still retaining a piece of the school's old charm.

Submission of Objection: SSD8310 - Redevelopment of North Curl Curl Primary School

1. Failure of site analysis / architectural plans to incorporate up-to-date survey detail of adjoining development including 60 Abbott Road

The impacts to adjoining development, in particular to the directly adjoining residential property at 60 Abbott Road (south-east corner of the site) have not been satisfactorily considered. The site analysis/architectural plans fail to incorporate up-to-date survey detail of adjoining development, including boundary lines, current footprint of dwellings and associated private open space areas and location of existing trees/vegetation. Associated amenity impacts (direct and cumulative) have not been satisfactorily considered.

2. Excessive size, bulk and scale of buildings, associated overshadowing and privacy impacts in particular Building / Block C

The existing set of circumstances include single storey demount-able class buildings adjacent to the east side boundary, which do not result in any unreasonable overshadowing impacts to its residential neighbours. The proposed development introduces a series of new buildings in a U-Shape arrangement to the southern half / south-east corner of the site. The building are 2 storey+ in scale and exceed the maximum 8.5 metre height requirement (11.25m) which applies to the R2 low density residential zoning of the site and its surrounds. The shadow diagrams fail to incorporate up-to-date survey detail of adjoining development. The overshadowing impacts and associated visual bulk of Block C in particular, to the dwelling and rear private open space of 60 Abbott Road is unreasonable.

Having regard to the current set of circumstances, the size of the site (27,982sqm), the proposed height non-compliance and that the site does not possess any significant topographical constraints, it is considered that the cumulative amenity impacts associated with this aspect of the proposal to its residential neighbours, is unsatisfactory and not well founded.

Increased setbacks to Block C combined with an amended design of Block C eg single storey (rather than 2 storey) are possible solutions which would address/improve the response and transition of the development to adjoining low density residential land use.

The height and size of the building raises concerns regarding privacy, with students in block C being able to directly look into the garden and back living room of 60 Abbott Road.

3. Streetscape, setbacks and landscape setting to the south-east corner of the site

The proposed carpark to the south-east corner of the development results in the loss of a number of existing trees and vegetation which softens this respective corner of the site and offers a landscape transition between the school and adjoining residential development, in particular 60 Abbott Road. The south setback to the carpark is poor (and forward of Block B) and results in a poor landscape response to the streetscape of Abbott Road as well as a poor transition between an education and residential land use.

It is recommended that the landscape setbacks to the south-east corner of the site (east side and south front) be increased to improve the transition and amenity between land uses as well as improve the landscape setting to Abbott Road (noting the R2 Zoning of the site). It is also recommended the carpark be amended such that it is not forward of Block B to enhance the landscape/streetscape presentation to this aspect of the site and improve the development's response to its context, when viewed as a whole.

4. Asbestos

Page 17 of the SEE states 'Significant quantities of asbestos cement sheeting and compressed asbestos cement sheeting were identified at the site. What additional precautions/measures does the applicant propose to ensure its removal does not impact adjoining residential development, in particular 60 Abbott Road?

5. Out of school hours service

What are the traffic, access, parking impacts and proposed parking arrangements associated with this component of the application? having regard that a new carpark area has been introduced to the SE corner of the site, directly adjacent to 60 Abbott Road.

Can we see the complete DA application including floor plans with existing and proposed areas?
Can you explain the reason for the submitted design with all buildings closer to abbot street?
Is there a provision for solar power storage and any other sustainable measure?
Is there a construction program available?
Why many trees are being removed if there won't be new construction where they are located?

Thank you for the opportunity to submit my views on the alterations and redevelopment of our local school. I have one son still attending NCCPS and one that finished in the last few years. We have been parents of children at the school for almost 10 years.

The school has a distinct Australian and local appeal, feel and appearance, with open grassy areas, early 1900's wooden buildings and 1950s red brick structures. It boasts some beautiful and critical flora and forna including the plumber birds who nest each year. A large number of parents have given many weekends to the nature-based improvements at the school and the environmental improvements continue year-on-year. These, along with the animals and gardens at the school add to real-life education, one where children can get out of man-made structures and experience life, as is recommended in proven education systems like those in Finland.

I don't believe the proposed structures in themselves offer any benefits beyond what can already be achieved in the current more natural environment of the school, or what modifications that are sympathetic to the existing structures can offer.

The money spent could easily be used in enhancing the educational experience of the students in being connected to the existing and growing environment naturally present in the school. Removing students from a connection to naturally occurring environment of animals and plants and placing them in structures that completely devour this seems anti-educational in my view.

Surely in education we should take lessons from populations who's educational outcomes far exceed our slipping ones? Why continue to drive a system with 'deflating tires', when we can switch to a new one that will take our children forward!

I fully support the proposed plans for the redevelopment of Curl Curl Primary School. The existing site comprises very old buildings with many demountables having been placed around in various parts of the school to meet the ever increasing growth of the school. The current oval has a dangerous dry dirt surface and it makes sense to reposition the school over it (on the Abbott Rd side). The proposed plans allow for a much more coordinated school with better layout and updated facilities to meet 21st learning needs of our students and to accommodate for 1000 students. The plans suggest not excessive height in keeping with the feel of the current school and allow for a good amount of open space for play and learning.

I am objecting to any signage directly outside my front door on the verge,just having spend over a $1000 on tree removables and returf of that area to keep it neat and tidy for the community ,now find that because of this ,someone finds its a nice place for a sign.I dont want to feel part of the construction zone everytime I return home.
Also there are other numerious options for directing trucks,or informing traffic of truck movements into the drive way ,please note this is a 40 km zone and the proposed truck entrance has been in existence for 50 years servicing the school with no signs at all, suitable other locations would be road markings or corner locations or even on the other side of the road which would be more visable.
Also I am concerned about all the truck movments directed at this driveway(Playfair road ) used for construction ,when a better achievable outcome could see nearly all the construction trucks and the trucks used for the clearing of the grounds, use the schools Abbott Road existing driveway ,thus not impacting so much on the residents of playfair road,
I am sure this achievable with the right planning .
Regards Terry Gray