35-75 Harrington Street, The Rocks

See attached letter.

Dear Sir / Madam,
I am a long-term resident of the Millers Point / Rocks precinct and am very concerned at the increasing number of recent developments that have breached height and bulk restrictions that have traditionally protected the heritage and historical nature of this unique area of NSW.
These long-term parameters were established by the Sydney Cove Redevelopment Authority ('SCRA') under the Sydney Cove Redevelopment Act of 1968. They have served the citizens of NSW well over many decades in protecting this most important and highly valued heritage area from inappropriate development that would detract from the area's value to the wider NSW community.
The SCRA provides for maximum allowable building heights for this site that would be significantly breached by the currently proposed development.
Unfortunately this proposal is one of a number of recent development projects in the area that have already been approved by the (former) NSW Government and its consent authorities, outside of traditional parameters set by the SCRA for the protection of the Millers Point / Rocks area.
These include increases to the bulk and height of the (recently sold) Sirius Building , The 'Harrington Collection', the Youth Hostel and the Fort Street Public School.
As a purely privately owned and for commercial use development, the proposal for 35-75 Harrington Street should not be given any latitude at all to breach previously established SCRA parameters.
This proposal, and any future developments in the defined Millers Point / Rocks precinct, should not be approval unless they comply with the long-established limits that protect the area from inappropriate development and any associated reduction in its historic, heritage and cultural value to the wider NSW community.
Yours Sincerely,
Peter Fletcher
28 March, 2023

See attached document and photograph.

As owner of 48 Gloucester St, I’m impacted by this development. The size and scale of the development impact the heritage and village atmosphere of the surrounding area of Gloucester and Cambridge street.
We are concern about the over shadowing on 48 Gloucester St, particularly in the morning.
We also object to the proposed building beyond the existing heights. The rocks is a historical heritage area any development should be low scale ( in size and form) to strike a balance for people living in the city.

Please see attachment.

Development in The Rocks should be strictly restricted to the envelope of the existing building, so the development should not be higher than its current level.
The locating of mechanical plant and equipment on the roof is a significant problem in The Rocks (The Argyle, Cleland Bond Building and The Rocks Centre are currently significant sources of noise pollution in the near vicinity). All such plant and equipment should be housed inside enclosed plant rooms and properly acoustically treated.

Attention: Anna Nowland

I am writing to you in regarding SSD-32766230.

SJB Planning has been engaged by the owners of No 34-52 Harrington Street, The Rocks to prepare a submission regarding this application.

We note the notification period ends on Tuesday 11 April but would appreciate if we can obtain a two week extension to Wednesday 26 April given our late engagement and impending public holidays.

Many thanks
Simon Smith
Associate
SJB Planning

Attention: Anna Nowland re Amended Proposal - SSD-32766230 - 35-75 Harrington St, The Rocks

We are writing on behalf of the leaseholders of No. 34-52 Harrington Street, The Rocks located to the south of the development site.

No. 34-52 Harrington Street contains the “Evans Stores and Harbour Rocks Hotel” which are both listed as State Heritage Items (see Item Nos. 01545 & 01611).

Whilst we appreciate that some additional ‘Sun Eye View – Solar Access Diagrams’ form part of the amended application, we maintain our concerns regarding the proposed alteration to the approved building envelope under the Sydney Cove Redevelopment Authority Scheme (SCRA) and associated impacts to No. 34-75 Harrington Street as documented in our previous correspondence dated 26 April 2023 and outlined in the attached written submission.

I object to the proposal in its current form.

My concerns largely relate to :
(1) The loss of views / vista from the Cahill Steps as shown in the Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) due to requested building height increase
(2) The proposed streetscape of Cambridge Street
(3) The request to increase the height of the building contravenes the Long Term parameters as set by the 1968 Sydney Cove Redevelopment Act.

I have provided several proof points and views for my concerns and objections below and would be happy to engage further but to be completely honest any feedback provided previously on any/all redevelopments in the area appears to have simply been simply swept aside by the (former) NSW government in support of commercial objectives without regard or due consideration to The Rocks as a historical heritage residential area. If this has changed, and I hope so, I’m happy to reengage further on these points if required.

(1) Loss of view/vista from the Cahill Steps.
• These steps and the view they provide of the broader area (circular quay to opera house) are a destination in their own right and provide a unique and panoramic view of the circular quay area.
• The proposed new building obliterate this view. While the view of the opera house itself is not impacted, this view can be seem from many vantage points. The view of the broader area is essentially being obliterated and it is not and I believe cannot be replicated from any other position with the area.
• This is a real impact I don’t believe has been substantially assessed.
• The only views of the broader area (circular quay to opera house) will now be from fee paying commercial venues such as the rooftop being proposed.
(2) The proposed streetscape of Cambridge Street.
• The back of the proposed new buildings provides even less street scaping and convivial design than currently exists and is not in keeping with ir sympathetic to the heritage nature of the area.
• If changes are to be made, make the holistic and make them better for all residents, tourists and visitors, not just a recreation of, or relance of justification on, prior bad design.
• If any one cared to make note, there are well in excess of 100 wedding parties per annum that make use of this laneway for wedding photography. Many of these wedding parties are from overseas. The reduction in ‘pretty’ street scaping, that blends in with the heritage nature of the area, will detriment the areas draw to this lucrative business for the area and local businesses.

(3) The request to increase the height of the building contravenes the Long Term parameters as set by the 1968 Sydney Cove Redevelopment Act.
• Seriously, how ‘heritage’ is an area that is simply allowed to grow ‘up’wards and into an area of rooftop bars trading 7 days a week. That’s is what The Rocks through NSW government approvals is becoming.
• These original 1968 guidelines were created from a desire to preserve the fabric and history of the area.
• We should be aiming to have a higher consciousness and stop this endless approvals ‘up’wards (increased building height) simply because a precedence was set by the former government and now no one has the proverbial footballs to stop this.
• The Rocks is a unique display of Australian history that once obliterated cannot be replaced.
• Stop approving ‘up’wards and make commercial entities reconsider design within the existing space envelopes or, if you had to, considering allowing going down, not up, that’s what some global cities (London, Paris etc.) have opted for to preserve their unique streetscapes, light and heritage.
• A fundamental difference with these cities is scale, Sydney’s Rocks area is unique but very small and so every single decision impacts.

Im certainly NOT in objection to progress. but to maintain the herritage fabric of the area, teh postive tourist and local use of the area and to delvier positrive change throuight progress i belive this submsision needs to reconsider the above points.

As a resident of Gloucester Street, I am extremely concerned with the size, bulk and scale of the proposed building. It does not suit The Rocks, and would be an eyesore particularly in contrast to the quaint buildings and walkways that are nearby. Visually it will dominate the landscape from all aspects, especially the back lane.
It will be significantly larger and as a result we will loose our few short hours of sunlight and decreased privacy.
The ongoing demolition and rebuilding will generate unwelcome noise and vibrations and as a result be extremely disruptive to residents, tourists and city visitors.
The current air conditioning unit on the existing building is very noisy. Consideration for containing the noise in any changes made would be necessary to improve the charm, liveability and grace of The Rocks.

Thank you for your consideration.

As residential owners in The Rocks (adjacent to the proposed development), we already must deal with noise from multiple venues up to midnight and into the early hours of the morning. Currently, The Argyle Pub, the MCA function centre and The Glenmore Hotel all have loud music in the close vicinity of our apartment at 88 Cumberland St, The Rocks. The addition of another roof top place of entertainment should not be considered at all and so we object to the development in its current form (i.e., with a rooftop pool and entertaining areas).
If the rooftop pool and entertaining areas are to be approved, then the problem with the current submission, and specially the EIS, is that it does not acknowledge the immediate area as a residential domain. The writer confirms in the EIS, the recommended management measures “will comply with the relevant criteria at all the surrounding commercial and retail receivers”. The Rocks has always been, and is increasingly growing, as a residential community.
I object to the development of this site to include rooftop pool and entertaining areas, as it will further add to the already unbearable noise we currently have to deal with at night and into the early hours of the morning. We ask that the Department have the roof top amenities deleted by the Developer before any approval is granted

Please withhold my Name and details
I am the owner of a residential apartment in The Rocks and already deal with constant mechanical noise and noise generated by entertainment venues nearby, particularly The Argyle Pub and to a lesser extent the MCA function Centre and The Glenmore Hotel who all have loud music in the close vicinity of my apartment at 88 Cumberland St, The Rocks. Another outdoor roof top place of entertainment should not be considered, and all plant and equipment associated with the development enclosed and acoustically treated, as such I object to the development in its current form.
The “quite enjoyment” of adjacent residential neighbors must be considered over and above the current stated criteria of the surrounding commercial and retail receivers. The standard must cater for surrounding residential neighbors.
I request the Department have the roof top amenities deleted and that full consideration be given to all noise generating activities as well as proper placement and treatment of plant and equipment.