Upgrade to North Sydney Public School

The school is in the middle of a low residential area and the proposal to build a three storey block will impact those residential properties. It is unclear to me why this new building needs to be three stories which will impact the aesthetics of the neighbourhood. I am concerned, as I live on Bay Road of the additional impact on the road with the additional students and teachers and also ask that due consideration be given to the neighbourhood and speed of traffic. I request that the new building be considered to be only two stories, not three stories as that is not aligned with the low residential buildings that surround the school (it is a school in a residential space) and that more trees are place around the boundaries to make it more aesthetically appealing. You will be taking away views of trees by placing a three storey building up.

Unrelated but relevant, the school needs to reconsider it's neighbours when they decide on lunch break, mid morning break music. It is so disrespectful to the neighbours.

Thank you for relisting the project for public submissions - last year when I provided a submission you indicated to me that any public consultation had already taken place. Although no one in the community seemed to know about the demolition of Lady Hall at the North Sydney Demonstration School and which you make no mention in the head line comments (misleading???) .

I am writing in relation to the proposed upgrade of North Sydney Public School (formerly named Lady Hay School) and the demolition of the ‘Lady Hay Hall’ (Refer to ‘History of Waverton’ below). I believe there is an oversight to your proposal, as the Lady Hay Hall has significant heritage and community value to our neighbourhood. Our heritage is the places, objects and stories that we as a community have inherited from the past and want to protect for future generations.

On searching the NSW Heritage database it states that three buildings at the North Sydney Demonstration School are listed on the SINSW Section 170 Heritage and Conservation Register - ‘North Sydney Public School – Buildings B00A, B00D and B00F, Gates and Period Fence’ (Item No. 5065652). The listing only applies to the buildings and not the whole site. The following extract from the Statement of Significance is from the updated DoE Heritage and Conservation Register listing sheet (Extent Heritage, 2019): “North Sydney Public School has a collection of prominent elements from the 1890s through to the 1930s. The current school grounds are historically significant as a diverse, layered assemblage of landscape features from the Colonial and Interwar periods. The design and proportion of public-school buildings reflects the aspirations of the Education Department to provide high quality educational facilities for communities on the North Shore. The sandstone and wrought iron gate and fence are rare elements of estate housing in Sydney in the late nineteenth century. The aesthetic considerations of the school are held in appreciation by the school staff and NSW Education Department.’

The North Sydney Council Development Control Plan (DCP) 2013 provides guidance on provisions for design and development controls that should be considered when developing the design for the school. It appears that you are utilising Clause 11 of SEPP State Significant Development, so Council’s DCP does not apply allowing you to BULLDOZE our Community’s 90 year old school hall. Given the large site (1.9 hectares) there is plenty of space to erect a new school hall without taking away our existing hall– ie carpark, dilapidated basketball court.

I have not been consulted, nor by neighbours, or heritage planners at North Sydney Council or anyone I have talked to in my Community about the School’s impending upgrade. We as parents of the school have been locked out of the school for over 18 months and have limited communication.


A James



History of Waverton
by
Ian Hoskins

2010
Waverton
The suburb of Waverton is on the traditional land of the Cammeraygal people. The bush and rock outcrops at Balls Head still feature carvings and other archaeological evidence of the original owners. As late as 1878, Aboriginal people were camping on the foreshore of Berrys Bay, but as the population and social structure of the original harbour clans had been comprehensively undermined by the early 1800s, it is improbable that this group contained descendants of the Cammeraygal. They may have been people displaced from the south coast of New South Wales, as groups from the south were also gathering at Circular Quay at this time. These people, and probably the Berrys Bay Aborigines, were 'relocated' to La Perouse in the 1880s.
Waverton is located in the North Sydney local government area, on the north side of Sydney Harbour. The suburb extends from Balls Head north to the Pacific Highway. It adjoins the suburbs of Wollstonecraft to the north-west, Crows Nest to the north-east, and North Sydney to the east. It has extensive waterfront areas in Berrys Bay and around Balls Head.
Early landholders
The suburb takes its name from Waverton House, built by Joseph Purser in 1845 on land purchased from Alexander Berry. William Carr and then his widow, Charlotte, owned the house from 1850 to 1865. The Old family owned it from 1865 to1974, when the building was demolished.
The whole of Waverton was part of the 524-acre (212-hectare) Wollstonecraft land grant which also encompassed present-day Wollstonecraft and part of Crows Nest. Edward Wollstonecraft, who was a business partner of Alexander Berry, settled on the north side of the harbour to escape the unhealthy living conditions of lower George Street in the city. He built Crows Nest Cottage around 1821. His partner Berry is best known for his large land holdings on the South Coast at the Shoalhaven River, around the township of Berry.
The Berry estate
Alexander Berry married Edward's sister, Elizabeth Wollstonecraft, and after Edward's early death in 1832, she became the owner of the estate. Upon her death in 1845, Alexander began subdividing sections of the estate. The sale of the land for Waverton House dates from this time. The gradual subdivision over a century from the 1830s to the 1930s profoundly influenced the character of Waverton. As areas were opened for development, each took on the dominant architectural and planning characteristics of the day.
Berry also gave five acres (two hectares) of land to his good friend Reverend WB Clarke in 1870, upon Clarke's retirement as the first rector of St Thomas's Anglican church. Alexander Berry was a great benefactor of Clarke's church, and enjoyed discussing matters of science, philosophy and religion with the renowned amateur geologist.
Elizabeth and Alexander had commenced construction of a large home to be called Crows Nest House in the early 1840s. After Elizabeth's death, Berry lived alone in the house (with a retinue of servants) from 1850 until his own demise in 1873. The land, by then called the Berry Estate was then passed on to David Berry, Alexander's brother. He died in 1889 and the north shore land was inherited by the Berrys' cousin, John Hay.
A sizable strip of the Berry Estate land was given to the colonial government for the construction of the Milsons Point to Hornsby railway, completed in 1893. The completion of Waverton railway station (then called Bay Road station) added to the commercial attractiveness of the land at Waverton, and Hay put several large subdivisions on the market. Amidst economic depression little was sold. In 1904 further subdivisions were created, with wide streets.
Subdivision proceeded more rapidly under Hay's ownership. After he died in 1909, Lady Hay approved further sales in 1911, 1913 and 1921.
She died in 1931. There were three more subdivisions around Crows Nest House, subsequently called the Lady Hay estate, in 1931, 1932 and 1934. The housing stock on these various subdivisions changed from large Federation era homes to a mix of interwar Functionalist and Old English styles. The North Sydney Demonstration School (originally called the Lady Hay School) was built in 1931 and Crows Nest House was demolished in 1933.

I would like to make a submission regarding the above application. I do not object but would like you to
consider my submission.
I am a resident and owner in my home in North Sydney area since 1986. Over time the North Sydney
Public School or North Sydney Demonstration School has grown and the current application will increase
the student numbers from 869 to 1012.
The growth of the school has led to the increase in rubbish and its removal frequency and volume by
private commercial contractors at unsociable hours disturbing our sleep in the early hours of the morning.
To improve on our noise amenity and reasonable expectation of the residents and our community, I
suggest imposing Hours of Operation for Rubbish Removal similar to Construction Hours Standard
Condition of Development. The standard Construction Hours are 7am-5pm Monday to Friday; 8am-1pm
Saturdays and no work permitted on Sundays and Public Holidays.
However as this Rubbish Removal Condition would be lasting, I would concede to extended hours of
7am-7pm Mondays to Fridays.
I appreciate your consideration and remain.

Yours sincerely

Resident

Edward Precinct objects to the design of the project and has prepared and attached a detailed review.

I have resided in North Sydney since 1978. Our children attended the Dem between 1982 and 1990 so we have a long association with the school.

My wife and I think that development of the Dem is a good idea, particularly the removal of “temporary” classrooms. However, we do not consider that the project has been well designed. We think that the major new building along Bay Rd is unattractive and not in keeping with the heritage design of the remaining original school buildings. We further think that the building is too close to Bay Rd as outlined in the Edward Precinct paper and propose that it is set further back and designed with brick walls and a hipped (rather than a sloping) roof. In our view the size of the land (1.7 ha) should be sufficient to design an attractive and architecturally sensitive school.

OBJECTIONS TO SDD-11869481, 182 Pacific Highway, North Sydney
I would like to lodge an objection against this proposal for a number of reasons. I am an owner and ratepayer of a unit in 12-14 Bay Road, North Sydney, SP 22319.
Whereas I support development of the school, the below items are not acceptable.
I have owned this strata apartment since 1985 and it is located directly opposite the proposed SSD.
I object on the following grounds:
Setback of the new buildings
The setback of these new buildings, whose height is greatly increased from single storey to three stories is not sufficient and the height appears to breach the height standard for the site. These new buildings will cause both shadowing on Bay Road and also our block of 15 apartments. The setback should be increased and/or the building heights lowered or redesigned in a tiered fashion. These buildings are too visually prominent.
Trees
I object to the removal of the mature trees. These trees should be kept and protected and this is in complete contradiction to the NSLGA plan to maintain tree canopy especially in view of the loss of trees in the LGA due to WHTL. We need more trees, not less.
Buildings themselves
I object to the fenestration as it should be double glazed both from a noise aspect and also energy efficiency.
Traffic – objection to overuse
Bay Road is overloaded with traffic. Since owning the unit for 35 years, I have seen the traffic volume increase. In fact, with WHTL proposal, the intersection of Bay and Pacific is expressed as ‘a fail’. Equally with the development of “Waterhen”, there will be increased traffic.
https://www.minister.defence.gov.au/minister/melissa-price/media-releases/indigenous-company-deliver-hmas-waterhen-upgrades
Other options for ‘kiss and ride’ should be explored and made safer. This should be completely redesigned. Perhaps use of the forecourt off Pacific Highway could be considered. A comprehensive traffic management plan during construction should be provided.

Whilst I am supportive of the overall upgrade to the school, I am disappointed that there has been a decision not to upgrade the school basketball courts as part of this development. This is probably the only opportunity to do this necessary upgrade. The courts are in a state of disrepair, the ground is sloping and uneven, and the hoops / backboards are falling apart. For any child who currently plays basketball, this makes them very difficult to use and doesn't create an incentive for other children to participate in sport. The school doesn't have an oval and these courts are the only opportunity the school has to teach children a sport in a proper sporting environment.

In addition, there is a significant lack of sports facilities in the North Sydney Council area as a whole (1 outdoor basketball court for ~75k people which is permanently in use by adults). The school has an opportunity to upgrade these facilities, and potentially partner with community sport to provide much needed capacity to encourage children to play sport.

Generally I support the project. However in my opinion the building form of the buildings facing Bay Road is incongruous in the location given the school grounds are surrounded on 3.5 of its boundaries by a heritage conservation area. The verticality of the elements that face Bay Road make the development look more like a Data Centre such as the one currently under construction on the pacific Highway at Artarmon.The conservation area is dominated by buildings with horizontal elements rather than vertical elements. This incongruity is increased by the visual prominence of the building form so close to the Bay Road boundary. In my view this has an unacceptable visual impact on the public domain.
There must be proper acoustic safeguards if the Hall is to be used after hours for community and school functions. In my experience as a planning lawyer the failure to provide proper acoustic safeguards for the surrounding community when the hall is used after hours leads to continual school/community conflict over noise and disturbance issues . Also there needs to be proper traffic management plan if the hall is to be used after school hours to also avoid school/community conflict.

The construction management plan is sparse to say the least. it doesn't seem to recognise that at present there are many major construction projects in NorthSydney and that construction traffic is very heavy in all streets not just on the Highway. Trucks like to line up in the early hours of the morning in Bay road and Edward Street and keep their engines running until they can move off to whatever project they are involved with.The traffic in Bay Road is very heavy even without construction vehicles. This hasn't even been mentioned. There will also be further construction traffic with the proposed development of Waterhen at the end of Bay Road.
This makes the proposed "kiss and ride" on Bay Road a very unsafe option. There should not be a second entry to the school on Bay Road as proposed.The traffic at this point in the mornings would make any attempt to let children out at that location extremely hazardous .

Traffic – objection to relocation of kiss and ride:
Page 24 of the Social Impact Assessment for this project states that the kiss and ride site currently on McHatton Street will be permanently moved to Bay Road. Bay Road is currently overloaded with traffic, as it is the main point of access from the Pacific Highway to Waverton station and the HMAS Waterhen Naval Base. It is the main point of access to the Sydney CBD for all Waverton and North Sydney residents living on the western side of the Pacific Highway.

The proposed move of the kiss and ride site to Bay Road would significantly increase the amount of traffic on Bay Road, which poses a serious risk to the safety of children and pedestrians. Moreover, the increased volume of traffic will lead to significant congestion due to the large number of cars that already use Bay Road as a major entry point to the Pacific Highway. The set of traffic lights at the intersection of Bay Road and the Pacific Highway is a traffic bottleneck that already experiences substantial congestion in the mornings, and this will only be worsened by relocating the kiss and ride site to Bay Road.

I strongly object to the relocation of a kiss and ride from McHatton Street to Bay Road, especially since McHatton Street is a quiet and safe street that can ensure the safety of young children entering and exiting the school. Alternative options for the kiss and ride location should be explored, and a comprehensive traffic management plan during construction and after construction should be provided, with due consideration paid to how residents and visitors will be able to use the road.

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the welcomed development of North Sydney Demonstration School.

My concern is primarily in relation to availability of active recreational areas for the number of current students, as well as the anticipated number of future students.

In particular, I note the existing active 3-6 play equipment located to the west of the current Hall will be demolished and further note, as per Clause 3.5.3 Sports facilities of the SSDA that the existing basketball courts in the south-west corner of the school will remain unchanged as a result of the proposed upgrades.

I note that with the removal of the temporary buildings and the installation of the Cola that there will be new areas of the school grounds which the students can enjoy recreationally, however given the removal of the active 3-6 play equipment, I consider it is now more critical that the current condition of the active basketball courts be addressed, namely:

1. the slope of the courts be remedied, and
2. Suitable shade/sun protection isinstalled over the courts

In particular, the lack of protection from the harsh sun is a concerning issue and should be considered a priority for the Department of Education. It is particularly unbearable during spring and the summer seasons with temperatures on the courts frequently exceeding 40 degrees. It is unsafe and unreasonable for both students and the teachers supervising students to be exposed to the harsh rays.

There will be a number of beneficiaries if the courts are remedied, including:

1. Students and school staff
2. After School Care providers
3. Basketball and Netball Sports Clubs
5. General Community.

I sincerely hope you will take the above into consideration.
Thank you.

I am opposed to a three storey addition to North Sydney Demonstration School adjacent to Bay Rd. I think that the proposed building is too tall and close to the boundary, over-towering Bay Rd, and would possibly be better in three separate buildings. The flat roof is not the same as the hipped roofs of existing buildings, while wall construction is very different. It is out of character with the area, in which there are attractive heritage buildings. It will be a large, out of proportion eyesore at the end of Edward St. From the view of those people living or travelling up Edward St, it will be an unpleasing visual distraction.
Please amend the design.

Hi,
Please see attached document as a PDF.
I would like to ensure the mechanical ventilation is adequate to cope with COVID-19 if all the windows need to be closed per the acoustic engineering report.

Michael

Please note that North Sydney Council has no objection to the upgrade to North Sydney Public School. It is requested that efforts are made to minimise traffic impacts during construction and that all relevant permits and construction management plans are adhered to. It is also requested that vegetation loss is minimised in accordance with the lanscape plan. suitable measures are to be employed to protect vegetation during construction.

Regards.
Gavin McConnell