To whom it may concern

The attached PDF submission from the Art Gallery Society of NSW in support of the Sydney Modern Project replaces the earlier PDF version of the same document forwarded by Mr Brian Ladd, President of the Art Gallery Society of NSW earlier today.

Ron Ramsey
Executive Director
Art Gallery Society of NSW

Objection to the Sydney Modern Development proposal - DA SSD6471 3/11/17 by
John David Chesterman AM B.Arch dipT&CP LFAIA FPIA
I acknowledge that some of the material and opinion set out below is included in an objection co-authored with Bruce Donald, Gillian Appleton and Ros Andrews.
I object strongly to the proposed location and consequent design of the Art Gallery of NSW's proposal for its Sydney Modern Gallery - on the grounds that it would seriously damage the highly valued visual quality of:
* The setting of the existing historically significant Art Gallery building,
* The setting of the Woolloomooloo Gate to the Botanic Garden,
* The character of Mrs Macquarie's Road.
* The view from the Art Gallery to The Harbour
and would break the continuous tree line that forms the skyline of the Domain ridge when viewed fro the East.
I have carried out a detailed review of the Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) prepared as part of the EIS on the Proposal, which in my opinion, grossly understates the Proposal's adverse impacts.
As a long time premium member of the Art Gallery Society, I am supportive of the Art Gallery expanding its capacity, but not in a way that is so destructive of its surroundings, of The Domain and to itself.
I believe that there other ways of achieving its commendable objectives. To my knowledge alternatives have not (at least publicly) been adequately canvassed and they are briefly discussed below.
The Land-bridge
Following the construction of the Cahill Expressway across Circular Quay, Fig tree Avenue (across the Domain adjacent to northern boundary to the Botanic Garden) was significantly widened, with a bridge across it carrying Mrs Macquarie's Road. The Art Gallery sat at the edge of a deep cut down to the new road.
The construction of the Eastern Distributor (the ED) in the late1990's required further upgrading of this roadway. The ED was initially proposed as a surface or shallow-cut six-lane motorway from Macquarie St to the Airport. Its announcement caused a considerable public outcry and the government halted the project for review.
I was appointed by RTA as their urban design consultant to review the initial design submitted by the already selected design-build contractor for the project and assist in designing and negotiating a proposal that was more suited to its various contexts.
The notion of a tunnel from Woolloomooloo to the already existing land-bridge parallel to Macquarie Street was, at my instigation, investigated. However due to a subterranean geological fault it was found to be extremely costly - so the next best (by no means cheap) solution, a land-bridge to the north of the Gallery and the use of noise walls became the adopted solution where the motorway crosses the Domain.
The form of the land-bridge closely follows the natural contours of the Domain prior to the construction of Fig-tree Avenue, but the location of trees upon it was influenced by structural logic. An existing stand of trees to its north was reinforced with further planting.
The Gallery and the RBG management were both consulted during the design process. The capital cost of the land-bridge is being recovered by user tolls.
It was built largely to protect the natural context of the Art Gallery Building - not for its expansion.
The proposed Sydney Modern Building
The Gallery conducted a limited design competition to select an architect and a design for Sydney Modern. The entries can be seen on the Gallery's website. The winning SANNA proposal has the virtue of relative modesty that probably explains its selection. However, the VIA (An Appendix to the EIS) clearly illustrates the substantial and adverse changes of character that it would have, but interprets these impacts as only "Moderate." This is hard to credit.
Before a considerable amount of money is committed to a site and design that are not in the public's and Gallery's best interests a broadly based publically accessible comparative analyses of it and three alternatives should be carried out. The alternatives should include:
1. A four-storey structure attached to the Eastern end of the existing gallery building, where there is plenty of space that is of very little functional or recreational value to the Domain. The Gallery's Eastern façade has been substantially altered over time and is not, as incorrectly claimed in the EIS, a Vernon façade.
Entered at the Eastern end of the long central gallery in the building, Sydney Modern could have a clearly identified image. The new building would be prominent and could be linked at each level to the Gallery and share existing service access. It would enjoy excellent views that would include the Harbour (better than those from the proposed site).
2. Building within the splendid huge space under the Headland Park at Walsh Bay as part of the cluster of cultural institutions in this area. Without the need to build in a manner that keeps water out, generous and well-finished spaces could be afforded. A Metro station is planned immediately adjacent to this space.

3. Decentralizing to a location such as Paramatta - which could have considerable social benefits.


Comments on the Sydney Modern VIA 4/12/17
The Clouston VIA is a long and thorough document containing good images, much of which is, however, of little relevance because in most of the more distant and complex views analyzed, the Sydney Modern Proposal is of insignificant size and its visual impacts predictably low, or it can barely be seen.
However, the VIA's analyses of critical, mostly close up, views (11 - 20) that are in or of an area of high heritage and landscape value, because of the criteria applied in their analyses, reaches unbalanced conclusions that are inconsistent with the "before and after" images provided.
The bulk of the proposed building is misleadingly said to "cascade lightly" down to the Oil tanks. However where it is:
- adjacent to Mrs Macquarie's Road,
- seen from the Land-bridge lawn
- seen from within the Art Gallery building, and
- seen from the Woolloomooloo Gate to the Botanic Gardens
it would appear as white, largely un-articulated, boxes replacing a substantial stand of trees and views to The Harbour (and a glass-roofed entry structure that relates to nothing and will be of limited utility in this exposed location).
The Comparative Analyses of Visual Impacts on the Table below demonstrates why the visual impact of the Sydney Modern proposal is unacceptably HIGH.
The EIS asserts that the proposed building "speaks of the future". It would be more accurate to say that it shouts about it. The visual relationship between the existing Art Gallery Building and its important setting and the proposed Sydney Modern Building is one of extreme and intrusive contrast.
It is also worth noting that the claimed views from the terraces of the proposed building would be severely compromised or completely blocked by the substantial substation building to its north.
VP VIA PAGES
LOCATION & DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE EIS ASSESSMENT THIS ASSESSMENT
11 50-51 Opposite the Woolloomooloo RBG Gate, this view demonstrates an unsympathetic total change in character MOD HIGH
12 53-54 View of gallery from road looking Sth is almost totally blocked MOD HIGH
13 55-56 View East from road across Landbridge is largely obscured HIGH HIGH
14 56-57 From the Pavilion Café a large sector of the view is substantially changed from being natural (and also a distant view) to that of a large modern building. MOD HIGH
15 58-59 Views 15, 16 & 17 are experienced by pedestrians arriving at AGNSW on foot across the Domain MOD MOD/HIGH
16 60-61
and by motorists and pedestrians using Art Gallery road and Mrs Macquarie's Road HIGH
17 62-63 At present the Art Gallery building is seen within the natural setting provided by the stand of trees to the north of the land-bridge lawn. This visually significant stand would be destroyed and replaced by the proposed Sydney Modern. MOD/
HIGH HIGH

18 64-65 As can be seen, a view of the Harbour is eliminated from the most important public outlook from AGNSW and in a most unsympathetic manner MOD HIGH
19 66-67 It is unclear why the existing trees on the Land-bridge have been eliminated (vegetation to be removed) as they are located in the only position (over structure) where they can enjoy adequate soil depth. This is not a significant façade of the AGNSW building. The new trees shown are unlikely to be feasible. MOD MOD/HIGH
20 68-69 It is very unfortunate that the continuity of tree-line on the eastern ridge of the Domain (an important feature) would be destroyed - as can be seen from this view, and probably also from view-points further to the east. MOD HIGH

ASSESSMENT OF VISUAL IMPACTS using the images from critical View Points provided in the submitted Visual Impact Assessment - as shown on the pages noted in Column 2.

RE: Development Application SSD 6471 - Sydney Modern, Art Gallery of NSW, Sydney

To Whom it May Concern

Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission in support of the Art Gallery of New South Wales's recent Sydney Modern Project State Significant Development Application. This submission - in the attached PDF document - expresses strong support for this major project from the Art Gallery Society of New South Wales, the Art Gallery's membership body.

The Art Gallery Society supports the Sydney Modern Project because it will enable the people of NSW to enjoy more outstanding international art exhibitions; will offer increased display space for the Gallery's significant permanent collection; allow the Society to grow a more diverse membership; attract greater cultural tourism to NSW, and ensure the Gallery remains vibrant and relevant for many generations to come.

Yours sincerely,


Brian Ladd Ron Ramsey
President Executive Director
Art Gallery Society of NSW Art Gallery Society of NSW

IMPORTANT: Sincerest apologies. The previous two versions of my submission had pages which were somehow missing or corrupted in the process of sending them. If you could disregard the two previous PDF submissions made by Andrew Andersons and take this as the final document.

Apologies again and please feel free to contact me if there are any issues.

Please see attached submission