Introduction This submission contains several reasons for objecting the
"Alexandria Park Community School Redevelopment" SSD Application. The
high level reasons for objecting are listed below. Detailed
argumentation to support the objective is attached to this objection
as PDF. Objections - Detailed in the pdf attached to this objection 1/
Inconsistencies within the application on important development
aspects result in a significant degree of uncertainty on what is being
proposed and potentially approved. This should be unacceptable for any
development application but is especially relevant for this
application since it concerns a structure of this magnitude and the
inconsistencies are considerable (40% higher building) and involve an
important aspect of the application (building size/height). 2/
Supporting documents used as appendix for the EIS are based on
different parameters (building height, number of floors) than those
stipulated in the EIS itself. The inconsistencies are considerable
(Extra levels and 40% higher building) invalidating the conclusions of
these documents. Any assessment of impacts based on these (and
potentially other) documents becomes impossible. 3/ The proposed
building does not comply with SLEP controls "Clause 4.3 - Height of
Buildings" . The height non-compliance is very significant (21.1m
proposed which is 40.666% higher than 15m control). The EIS argues
that strict compliance is unreasonable and unnecessary but fails to
provide convincing argumentation to support that conclusion. The main
argument that there is public benefit of not complying with SLEP
controls is arguable since there is no educational benefit in creating
one huge neighbourhood school servicing several districts (Alexandria,
Redfern, Green Square, Waterloo, Zetland) instead of creating several
smaller schools closer to the residential hotspots. Research instead
shows that smaller schools deliver better educational outcomes
especially for disadvantages students which is relevant for Alexandria
Park School with its substantial Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
student population. 4/ The application directly violates several
Heritage recommendations for the direct neighbourhood. It is hard to
imagine that a +-200 m long, 5 storey 21m+ tall building does not
severely impact the aesthetic value of the Alexandria Park "heritage
industrial neighbourhood focused around middle class terrace
development". 5/ The impact on traffic has been investigated using
unrealistic assumptions and without taking WestConnex into account.
These deficiencies imply that the conclusions drawn from the report
are worthless and give the report the `' of being written with a view
of giving the project a green light instead of being written as to
correctly reflect the implications of additional use of the road
infrastructure. Conclusion Together, the above should present
sufficient reason for any reasonable independent assessment which is
more than a rubber-stamping exercise, to if not outright reject, than
at least significantly alter, the development application. There is a
need for school expansion and redevelopment but if all parties make an
effort, this could also be achieved with smaller schools and
reasonable impacts to the neighbouring community.

See attached.

See attached letter.

To Whom It May Concern: As a neighbouring property owner in 15-17
Fountain Street, I would like to submit an objection to the Alexandria
Park Community School Redevelopment based on the below points:
Exceeding the height limit of 15m: - The surrounding area has a height
limit of 15m as outlined on the Sydney City Council website. - The
proposed school building height is a concern. It will cause shadowing
onto the buildings and common areas of the apartment complex of 15-17
Fountain Street. - The school buildings should not be any higher than
the adjoining buildings within the area as it will change the feel of
the village type suburb and neighbouring buildings. Current community
and village feel environment is compromised: I understand the school
growth and redevelopment is necessary to cope with the growing
population but I strongly feel that the current development proposal
risks to substantially alter the neighbourhood by transforming it to a
suburb dominated by a giant school. There is a clear need for the NSW
government to reconsider the extent of the Alexandria's Park school
redevelopment and also invest in additional school space in the
Waterloo/Green Square/Zetland areas where it is closer to the new
residential developments. Additional school in Waterloo/Green
Square/Zetland area will promote road safety as children will be able
to walk to school safely rather than catching a bus or rely on their
careers drop-offs and pick-ups. Traffic and congested roads: Traffic
at the moment is very heavy especially in peak hours and this
redevelopment will cause more constraints to the local roads. Street
parking is very limited and will be a bigger concern with the added
road users. We have already raised our concerns with Westconnex
development and this should be addressed by the NSW government. I am a
young, forward-thinking professional and a community member. I
strongly support progress and new developments. However, these should
benefit many, not few. The proposed development of the Alex Park
School is a necessary initiative. However, it requires careful
management and reconsideration in terms of size, impacts on the
community and traffic management. I object to the proposal in the
current form. Yours sincerely, BG - Resident of a better Alexandria

As a neighbouring property owner in 15-17 Fountain Street, I would like
to submit an objection to the Alexandria Park Community School
Redevelopment based on the below points: - The height of the buildings
will directly impact the view from our apartment which currently
overlooks Alexandria Park and across the community to the city
skyline. - We recently purchased the property we live in based on the
the view and outlook the apartment currently has. The impact of this
project would provide a very different outlook and potentially impact
the value of our property. - The surrounding area has a height limit
of 15m as outlined on the Sydney City Council website. - The building
heights would be a concern to causing shadowing onto our buildings and
common areas of the complex. - The school buildings should not be any
higher than the adjoining buildings within the area as it will change
the feel of the village type suburb and neighbouring buildings.

To Whom This May Concern, I am writing to put in a submission to the
proposal for the Alexandria Park School Redevelopment. Our building is
located directly south of the proposal and I have concerns that the
proposal will have negative impacts as a result of its height,
overshadowing, visual and acoustic privacy impacts to myself and my
neighbours. 1. Height The height of the proposal exceeds the allowable
15m height limit. What will affect me in particular is the proposed
south hub as the documents indicate that there will be a canopy
proposed above the roof space which is what seems to exceed the
allowable height limit. The proposal needs to remove this canopy as to
not exceed the 15m height limit. 2. Overshadowing The shadow diagrams
supplied by in the Architectural drawing package are insufficient as
they do not show the shadow impacts onto my building which is located
directly south of the proposal. Shadow diagrams need to be prepared
and exhibited to show the shadow impacts from the proposed development
onto my building at June 21, between 9am and 3pm to prove that all
units that currently receive 2 hours sunlight will still have this
amenity maintained. 3. Visual and Acoustic Privacy The proposal
indicates a rooftop space at the south hub, adjacent our building. I
have concerns about the purpose of this space and its actual use as it
will affect the both visual and acoustic privacy to our internal and
external living spaces for myself and my neighbours during the
daytime, particularly when we are working from home. The school seems
to provide ample outdoor space for students to learn in and as break
out space so i question if this roof space is necessary. As mentioned
previously, the canopy of this roof space exceeds the height limit
regardless, so having this as non-trafficable would address with both
issues. 4. Setback There is no dimension on the drawings that indicate
the setback of the proposed buildings to the south. There is a 6m
setback from my building to the boundary and ideally to maintain
amenity as per SEPP 65/ Apartment Design Guide, a minimum 12m
separation between the buildings would be suitable, thus i would
expect that there would be a minimum 6m setback to the boundary for
the proposed southern buildings to maintain the amenity to our
building. The proposal does not indicate this I strongly object to the
proposal in its current form for the above reasons and request that it
be modified to address these concerns as they not only affect myself,
but also my neighbours. Regards, Viet Dang

I'm an owner / occupier of an apartment on the second floor of the
apartment block "the foundry" on the south-side of the proposed
development. Currently, my wife and I share this apartment and it
looks directly north over the current school facilities (mainly the
child care/pre-school section towards the rear of the apartment
block). The school currently is two storeys high with good space and
amenity between the two buildings (i.e. the pre-school and our
apartment block). The apartment currently has a good clear view over
he two storey high school, with trees for shade, lots of amenity and
space between our apartment and the school to allow for good natural
light and a breeze that allows a peaceful enjoyment of our apartment.
This is only possible due to a good distance from our apartment and
the adjacent school buildings (at least 25m/30m away). The gum trees
that line the fence between our apartment block and the current school
perimeter, plus the pre-school playground creates this amenable space
and distance, making the apartments peaceful and liveable. The current
building proposal will destroy any sort of amenity and natural light
that we currently enjoy facing north from our apartment patio. The
scale (i.e. up to 5 storeys high) and size of the building proposal
(i.e. right up to the boundary perimeter of our apartment block and
the school) will destroy any sort of distance between our apartment
block and the school, loss of all amentity, natural light and the
trees. The current distance between our apartment block and the school
creates space and clearly marks a demarcation between our apartment
block and the school currently. I'm documenting the following
objections to the proposed development: - eradication of natural light
into our apartment block - destruction of reasonable amenity -
invasion of privacy, being over-looked - increase on parking demand
around immediate area, as parents currently drop their kids off at the
school and then just leave their cars in the nearby streets all day to
go to work, pick up the kids later after work - it takes away my
general natural right to the peaceful enjoyment of our apartment and
patio. I don't mind the expansion of education in the local area, but
there needs to be more space and amenity between our apartment block
and the proposed school development on the southside boundary of this
proposal. The current space between the buildings is fine (25m or so)
- please leave it that way! [Redacted]

I strongly believe that the proposed five level school building will be
detrimental to the residents of Alexandria. As a recent purchaser in
the area, one of the appealing characteristics of the suburb is that
there are no mid or high rise buildings. The extra high levels of the
proposed school buildings will dwarf the surrounding buildings and
diminish the overall appeal of the suburb. Had I known about the
development before purchasing, I would not have proceeded. The parking
situation on the streets surrounding the school is already difficult.
The school drop-offs/pick-ups, additional school staff, after school
carers etc will further limit residents in their options for off
street parking. Given that there are many new residential developments
occurring in the area around Green Square, it appears to me that it
would be more fitting for a large school to be built in that area.
Such a large school would not look out of place there. I am also
concerned about the proposal to build additional sports fields. The
current park is beautiful and open as it is and the proposed changes
will also alter the characteristics of our neighbourhood. Whilst I
understand the need to provide high quality facilities for our young
people, I strongly believe that limiting the building to three levels
and limiting the number of students accordingly will provide the best
outcome for our community.