Skip to main content

State Significant Development


Darlington Public School Redevelopment

City of Sydney

Current Status: Determination

Interact with the stages for their names

  1. SEARs
  2. Prepare EIS
  3. Exhibition
  4. Collate Submissions
  5. Response to Submissions
  6. Assessment
  7. Recommendation
  8. Determination

The proposal entails the construction of a multi-storey school building consisting of 19 new homebases, new administration and staff facilities, new library and special programs rooms, new hall and canteen facilities and 3 new preschool classrooms.

Attachments & Resources

Request for SEARs (2)

Scoping Report
Scoping Report - Appendix A, B and C

SEARs (2)

Issued SEARs Cover Letter
Issued SEARs

EIS (65)

Environmental Impact Statement
A_1000 Cover Sheet and Drawing Schedule
A_1200 Existing Site Plan
A_1201 Proposed Site Plan
A_2050 Lower Ground Plan
A_2051 Upper Ground Plan
A_2052 Level 1 Plan
A_2053 Level 2 Plan
A_2054 Roof Plan
A_2101 Demolition Plan
A_2800 GFA Plans
A_3200 Elevations - 1_200
A_3300 Elevations - Signage
A_4200 Sections - 1_200
A_4201 Sections - 1_200
A_4300 Western Facade 1
A_4301 Western Facade 2
A_4302 Eastern Facade
A_5000 Shadow Diagrams Morning
A_5001 Shadow Diagrams Afternoon
A_6000 3D Views
A_6001 Photomontages
AA_Accessibility Statement
B_Design Report 1
B_Design Report 2
B_Design Report 3
BB_BCA Statement
CC_Arborist Report
DD_Consulation Outcomes Report
E_Survey Detail
E_Survey Lower Ground
E_Survey Upper Ground
EE_Visual Impact Assessment
F_Clause 4.6 Variation Request
FF_Hydraulic Infrastructure Management Plan
G_Noise and Vibration Assessment
GG_Integrated Water Management Plan
H_Childcare Planning Guidelines Assessment
HH_Electrical and Telecommunications Statement
I_Landscape Report
II_Lot Consolidation Plan
J_8001 Landscape Ground Plane Plan
J_8003 Landscape Tree Management Plan
J_8101 Landscape Detail Areas 1
J_8102 Landscape Detail Areas 2
J_8103 Landscape Detail Areas 3
J_8203 Indicative Planting Palette
K_Preliminary Construction Management Plan
L_Transport Impact Assessment
M_Heritage Impact Statement
N_Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Report
O_Social Impact Assessment
P_Preliminary Site Investigation
Q_Detailed Site Investigation
R_Remediation Action Plan
S1_Hazardous Materials Survey
S2_Asbestos Register
T_Civil Design Report
U_Biodiversity Development Assessment Report
V_Construction Waste Management Plan
W_Operational Waste Management Plan
X_ESD Report
Y_Geotechnical Report
Z_Structural Report

Response to Submissions (12)

Request RTS_16072020_111230
Response to Submissions Cover Letter
A1 - Design Report
A2 - Architectural Plans
B - Amended Indicative Planting Palette
C - Amended Landscape Report
D - Interim Site Audit Advice
E1 - RAP Cover Letter
E2 - Amended RAP
F - Biodiversity Statement
G - Local Council DA Arborist Report
H - Tree Canopy Comparison

Additional Information (15)

Arboricultural Impact Assessment 24112020
RFI Request for Additional Information #2
Letter Response to RFI #1
Att A - Design Report and Response to GANSW
Att B - Rev'd Arboricultural Assess't Appendix 2
Att C - Amended Planting Schedule
RFI Request for Additional Information #1
Letter Response to RFI #2
Att B - Tree Retention
Att C - Tree Retention Study
Att D - Existing Tree Location Plan
Att E - Amen'd L'scape Plans
Att F - Amended Tree Canopy Plan
Att G - Section Drawings
Att H - Contaminant Statement

Determination (5)

Notice of Determination
Assessment Report
Notice Of Decision
Development Consent
Approved Plans

Approved Documents

Management Plans and Strategies (26)

SSD9914 B7 - Darlington PS CCS Final
SSD 9914 - B7 Cover Letter_Rev1
SSDA 9914 - B18 - CWTS - Final
A30 Revised CEMP & CNVMSP - DPE Acknowledgement Letter 20092022
B10 Demolition Work Plan - DPE Acknowledgement Letter 30062022
D27 Stage 1 - Interim Audit Advice - DPE Acknowledgement Letter 19052022
B14 CNVMSP Rev 2 - 26082022
B12 CEMP Rev H - 08062022
SSDA - B13 & B28 - CTPMSP - Final_Part1
C21 Arboricultural Investigation Report (Rev A, 7 Feb 2022)- DPE Approval 25 Mar 2022
A30 Revised CEMP & CNVMSP - SINSW Cover Letter 09092022
SSDA - B13 & B28 - CTPMSP - Final_Part2
SSDA - B17 - Driver Code of Conduct - Final
DarlingtonPS SSD9914 Report Trees C21
SSDA - B15 - CSWMSP - Final
Approval of Plan Strategy or Study_01032022_045610
CEMP Review Acknowledgement
220614 - Stage 2 Sensitive Receiver Map
DPS - C23 Satisfaction Report - Rev B
SSDA 9914 Darlington PS C23 Cover Letter
Cover Letter SSD 9914 Condition A30_Revised
SSDA - B14 - CNVMP - Rev1
[G]210913 -Project Management Plan_DPS

Reports (1)

D10 Stage1, Structural Inspection Certificate cover letter - 10052022

Independent Reviews and Audits (4)

Appointment of Experts_18022021_055916
DOC - 210204 - DPS - C42 Independent Auditor (002)
Independent Audit Declaration - Darlington PS (RP)
Independent Audit Declaration - Darlington PS (CC)

Notifications (4)

SSD9914 Revise Strategies Plans Programs A29
SSD9914 Darlington PS Notify Occ D1
A29 Cover Letter
SSD 9477 - B1 and B2- Notification - Cover Letter

Other Documents (10)

SSD 9914 Cover Letter - B25 Biodiversity Credits
Alternative ESD Request Letter (002)
Darlington PS SSD9914 Ext Walls & Clad B4
D3 External Walls & Cladding Letter - 12052022
DPS - Out of Hours Event Management Plan - Typical Event
SSD9914 - Darlington PS - E1-E3 OOHMP - Cover Letter
210222 - DPS - Staging Report - V1.5 Final

Note: Only documents approved by the Department after November 2019 will be published above. Any documents approved before this time can be viewed on the Applicant's website.


Want to lodge a compliance complaint about this project?

Make a Complaint


There are no enforcements for this project.




Note: Only enforcements and inspections undertaken by the Department from March 2020 will be shown above.


Showing 1 - 11 of 11 submissions
Rebecca Link
NEWTOWN , New South Wales
I am very pleased to finally see the Darlington Public School being invested in and the school's capacity being increased given the master development plans for Darlington, Eveleigh and Redfern. Having schools will keep the area populated by families and ensure it maintains a sense of community. My only query is in regards to the number of bike/scooter parking spots being provided. Under section 3.10 Page 42 of the environmental impact statement it states that 70% of the current student population ride to school; Given the new student population of 400 if 70% were to ride to school that is 270 students but yet only 67 bike/scooter spaces are being provided. Given the focus on riding to school, can more spaces be considered? At least enough allow for 1/2 of that 70% or 140 spaces? 67 spaces will note ensure equal access for all. Please reply as to if an additional 73 minimum are able to be provided. Regards Rebecca Link
Name Withheld
HUNTERS HILL , New South Wales
The existing school complex is a well-maintained example of 1970s educational architecture in NSW, and tells an important part of the story of the local area. As such, prior to any works commencing, a condition of consent should be that full professional documentary photography is undertaken in order to preserve a permanent record of the architectural and local significance of the existing school buildings, which can be incorporated into City of Sydney archives and be displayed in the new building.
Von Dekker
CHIPPENDALE , New South Wales
Thank you for the opportunity to feedback on the Darlington Public School Redevelopment. The level of design and thought is outstanding I feel this is an excellent redevelopment.

However, after looking at the plans I am wondering if there isn't room for a dedicated "Indigenous Food Garden" space? Possibly on the rooftop of the current library? Or elsewhere within the current grounds?

This would fall in line with the NSW Governments Greener Places policy as reported here.
"The Department of Planning, Industry and Environment will release its draft Greener Places policy on Thursday, outlining guidelines for open spaces including parks, sporting fields, open corridors and rooftop gardens. It will inform planning controls at every level of urban development across state and local government."
As a member of the Darlington Public School P&C I am aware of some of the problems that the school faces.

I feel if we have an Indigenous Food Garden it would help the school in the following ways.

1. Indigenous lead development for the school - which would integrate, not just indigenous visual arts, but actually lived local knowledge, customs, and flora into the school's fabric.
2. Opportunity for our children to engage in growing, experiencing nature, and seeing local Indigenous customs in a lived real-world and holistic way.
3. Creating habitat for local species of birds and insects thereby increasing our local area/community's resilience going forward.
4. Opportunity for the school to fundraise money through selling produce to local Restaurants or Markets or possibly by hosting events.
The P&C has seen the great work being done by Clarence Slockee/Christian Hampson at Yerrabingin Indigenous rooftop farm as an example.
We understand Clarence Slockee has an existing relationship with FJMT architects, who are designing the Darlington PS Redevelopment. We hope to work with him or other appropriate parties to see this developed included in the Darlington Public School Redevelopment.

If there is currently no funding allocated to make this happen the Darlington Public School P&C is keen to explore ways to fundraise or apply for Grants to facilitate this.

Kind Regards
Biodiversity and Conservation Division
PARRAMATTA , New South Wales
Please find attached EES response
City of Sydney
SYDNEY , New South Wales
Please see attached
Name Withheld
REDFERN , New South Wales
I note the following aspects of the proposal
- Seek to redesign to accommodate an increase of 207 primary students, from 230 to 427, where current enrolment is 183;
- Seek to retain 60 preschool places, where current enrolment is approx 20
- Replace 1970s building stock with new building stock
- That Darlington PS has become part of the Newtown Primary Cluster (educational planning catchment), projected population increase of 350 by 2036, where in recent years it had been part of the Green Square Schools Cluster. As part of the Green Square Cluster, the population growth relevant to the school included the significant development in Green Square. It is not transparent to the public whether there has been a cluster recategorization, nor is it transparent what the impact of any such recategorization would be.

I object to the following aspects of the proposal:

- The expenditure on planning and consulting and building a structure that will reach capacity within 15 years, in the context of
o proposed limitless population growth,
o no proposed new local primary school site,
o no investigation of adaptation of the existing site configuration,
o a school system where some schools experience declining enrolments even in the face of population growth, which may indicate areas for action that do not relate to how new school facilities are.

- The incorrect justification basis that the 1970s building stock is nearing the end of its useable life expectancy, whereas 2021 building stock would be somehow longer lasting.
o No report indicates that the building is about to become unuseable, it is of solid and durable construction. Maintenance issues can be addressed by an improved maintenance program with attention to the root causes, eg drainage issues caused by hard surfaces at the north of the site which did not form part of the original landscaping design.
o Access issues could be addressed with a less intense renovation/rebuild program.
o The statement that “The existing teaching spaces are no longer fit for modern and future teaching methods”, is not a justification for the tearing down of a perfectly solid building. Adequate resourcing and support are enhancements that can be made with minimal disruption or negative impact to amenity.

- It is not clear that the proposal will meet projected capacity beyond 15 years. We cannot assess this proposal without transparency as to capacity projections.
o Is stated that “Under the ‘Do Nothing’ scenario, the current facilities at Darlington Public School would not be able to accommodate the projected increases in student numbers. This would likely result in poorer education outcomes and would compromise health and safety standards as student numbers would exceed the capacity of existing infrastructure."
o The school rebuild will result in the school exceeding capacity (415 projected, 407 capacity) by 2036. Will excess enrolments will be catered for by placing demountables on the playground shown in the figures?
o The figure of 350 additional students for the cluster is given for 2036, but it is not clear what the projection is beyond that. We know that significant population density increase is planned but not at the final detail stage for King St Newtown, Wilson St Newtown, Waterloo, and is underway in South Eveleigh, Erskineville and Alexandria (which is a source of out of area enrolments for Darlington). To what extent do changes in any of the figures for the given developments impact the student number projections?

- That a portion of the proposal has been split into a separate DA, with reduced transparency as to cumulative impacts of the proposal as a whole, in particular obscuring the number of trees to be removed.

- The significant proposed loss of trees.
o It is not clear how many trees will be removed – it appears all trees on site may go. In the main assessment the number given is 27 trees removed. In the landscaping report, the number given is 25 trees removed. In the main assessment, 19 trees will be retained. In the landscaping report, the number of trees on the school site guaranteed to be retained is 0. The landscaping report indicates that up to 5 trees may possibly be retained, subject to feasibility of landscaping around them. Several trees outside the school boundary will be retained.
o Figure 7 shows the abundance of mature trees on site. The arborists report and ecological report give more detail on the well established and healthy groves of trees on site, despite issues such as excessive concreting.
o Figure 5, the new school, shows many mature trees. The ecologist report indicates that almost all the trees on site are hollow bearing trees. However, trees of such size will not be achieved for decades.
o The loss of all trees on the site, to be replaced by new trees, does not align with the Premier’s Priority announcement of 2019 of “Increasing the tree canopy by planting one million trees in Greater Sydney by 2022”. Planting a tree to replace the one you cut down does not equal increasing the tree canopy.
o No consideration of cumulative impact of local loss of trees. Eg, a grove of trees was removed when Redfern Train Station was redeveloped; Council proposes to remove all mature trees along Lawson St; trees removed in the redevelopment of Alexandria schools; trees to be removed in redevelopment of Waterloo; etc etc.
o None of architectural design options a-d considered the impact on mature trees, which are a significant feature of the site.
o The benefit to students of such a well established group of trees is significant and no attempt has been made to assess how the loss of this benefit weighs against the gain of “modern, future proofed teaching spaces”

- The significant impact on native species:
o The MNE assessment for the grey headed flying fox, a vulnerable species, determined there would be no significant impact due to the loss of their feed trees. However this assessment does not take into account the cumulative impact of feed tree loss. All established feed trees for the fox on nearby Lawson street are also approved for removal, and many many more trees will soon be or have been recently been removed eg along Euston Road for Wesconnex, in Waterloo for redevelopment of housing estate.
o Almost all trees to be removed are hollow bearing. As in the point above, a significant number of hollow bearing trees have been / will be removed from multiple sites in inner Sydney, and the cumulative impact on wildlife is not insignificant and not considered in these development assessments.
o The biodiversity assessment concludes that the precautionary principle does not apply. However, there is a serious threat of irreversible damage to our environment from loss of habitat for species such as the flying fox, which is death by a thousand cuts. The precautionary principle does apply in this case.
o Intergenerational equity also applies, as the proposal would gift at least one generation of school children no mature trees on site. The loss of the trees is not an unavoidable impact.
o This proposal is not ecologically sustainable development – it will require 2 biodiversity loss offset credits, in the context of streamlined Native Vegetation Laws, extended drought, and more intense bushfire events, where tree loss is gathering pace, and biodiversity loss offset credits will never actually offset what is lost. Furthermore, the number of trees calculated for the biodiversity credit is only 27, whereas in fact a further number of trees are not guaranteed to be retained, and other trees are considered under a separate DA.

- The loss of amenity to the school due to loss of dedicated after care space. After school care hours are proposed to be changed to end at 5pm, rather than the existing 6pm, to enable community use of the shared space. It is bizarre to spend this money on enhancing the school and have one outcome be the loss of a dedicated after care space.

- The school playground will receive significantly more afternoon shadow in winter eg after 3pm than it does presently, while only capacity proofing the school for 15 years. Ie, it is possible that the playground will be further covered in buildings and will receive even less sun.

- It appears there will be insufficient bicycle/scooter parking space. This is not an improvement on the current situation, where there is insufficient/poorly arranged bicycle/scooter parking space.
o Only 67 bicycle/scooter spaces will be provided for a school of 437 students.
o In one part of the main assessment it is said that over 70% of students bike/scoot to school, and in another part of the report it shows approx. 30% bike/scoot. This range of 30-70% would require 131- 306 bike/scoot spaces.
o It is said that it is not expected that all students will keep their bike or scooter at school, without any explanation of the reasoning behind. All students who ride their bikes to school will keep their bikes at school, as it is very difficult for an adult to ride a childs bike away from the school. It is similar with scooters. Additionally many adults accompany their child on a bike or scooter and even if they could easily ride the child’s one, they cannot ride two at once.
HOMEBUSH , New South Wales
Ausgrid notes that Appendix FF to the EIS identifies that the proponent has made an application for connection to Ausgrid for the new development and has received a connection offer from Ausgrid. We encourage the proponent to continue to discuss their requirements directly with Ausgrid as needed
Sydney Water
PARRAMATTA , New South Wales
Thank you for referring SSD-9914 to Sydney Water, please see our response attached.
Environment Protection Authority
Sydney , New South Wales
Please see attached
Transport for NSW (Including RMS)
Chippendale , New South Wales
TfNSW Response
Heritage Council of NSW
PARRAMATTA , New South Wales
see attached letter


Project Details

Application Number
Assessment Type
State Significant Development
Development Type
Educational establishments
Local Government Areas
City of Sydney
Determination Date
Executive Director

Contact Planner

Nicholas Gunn