Moriah College Redevelopment

I am opposed to any further expansion of Moriah College for the following reasons:
The school already causes significant traffic congestion and parking problems in the area. Any further expansion will only exacerbate this
The existing set up of large buildings, surrounded by military style fencing with armed security guards in attendance is an ongoing concern for a residential suburb. Any further expansion of the school will only make this worse.
The area can ill afford to see any more natural scrub land destroyed.

I provide my major objections to this proposed development:
School Size
In 1993 the school sought to provide a junior school and expand by 530 students bringing the maximum number of students to 960 - residence at the time understood that this would remain the maximum number. Notwithstanding same over the years this number has increased. Moriah is already one of the largest schools in the Eastern Suburbs. This proposal requires approval for a total of 1966 students which is way over the top in a Resential area.
The school is currently at a tipping point requiring a new campus to be found. The site is not suitable for such a large school and if approved will represent a gross overdevelopment - enough is enough it size is impacting/eroding the amenity of the area.
Traffic
Drop off and pick up along local Queens Park Streets is chaotic and traffic congestion is already a major problem. Many many students park in the exclusion area streets every school day.
The School does not comply with its current approvals - there are constant breaches - which will only get worse.
New Buildings
The proposed new buildings are far too large (bulk/height) and intrusive for the area. They impact on the residential/parkland amenity.
Thank you
David Plaister

I object to the revised submission put forward by Moriah College, the revisions make little difference from the original proposal and will have a detrimental impact on the local community.

Queens Park Precinct objects to this development for a number of reasons. The details are in the attached document.
If you would prefer our submission as an unscanned document, please let me know.
Best regards
Peter Cohen
Co-convenor Queens Park Precinct

I have reviewed the revised DA for the project and have noted the changes from the original. Disappointing ly, no attempt has been made to address the issue of increased traffic flow as a result of increasing the student population.

I re-iterate my comments from ny original submission:

Two aspects of Moriah College already place a burden on the surrounding suburb:
- traffic flow around the school at student drop-off and pick-up times causes severe delays on York Road, Baronga Avenue and Queens Park Road.
- the number of cars parking in the surrounding streets during evening functions is increasing as the number of functions, and the number of attendees, grow, resulting in residents at times being unable to park in their own street.

As a condition of the approval of the development, Moriah College should be required to:
- utilise space within the College grounds for a drive-through student drop-off and pick-up; and
- provide sufficient parking within the College for evening functions.

My wife and I strongly oppose and reject this proposal
We are long term residents ( 30+ years ) of Queens Park and over this time the school generated car traffic has increased dramatically and created major delays in both the morning and afternoon in the area around Moriah College This congestion creates serious delays and it appears that about 80% of parents drop their children off and pick them up when public transport ( buses and trains) are readily accessible. This expansion will only increase this problem with associated air pollution and congestion.
Second, the the 3 and 4 story and bulky buildings proposed are not in keeping with the local area.
Third, the College has failed to manage its own Traffic and Parking Plan on a regular basis
Fourth, the School uses armed security guards which is a serious concern and against our Australian culture without publically available justification - and the increase in enrolments will only increase this "need"
The College has already taken over a Government Community Health Centre on the corner of York Road and so further expansion seems to be their objective.
Our concern is that the School's political connections and influence will override community concerns., At what point given all the problems created by this unbridled expansion will their scale be limited in keeping with community views regarding traffic etc ?
Our fear is that the next step will be that the School will seek to take over the native bushland reserve adjacent to their property. Their ambitions appear to be unbridled.
For these reasons we strongly object to this proposal which unfortunately has bypassed the local Council and community
Roger R Collins AM
Emeritus Professor UNSW

I am concerned that as part of Moriah's DA application is the installation of a pedestrian crossing on York Road between the school and Centennial Park? That will really jam up the traffic around the school! A better solution could be to ban Year 12 students from driving to school and parking in Centennial Park. This would help with so many traffic problems.
Also, there is no mention in their 'Existing Conditions' section of the huge impact on Queens Park Residents of Moriah's students, staff and parents driving, parking and dropping off students in our streets - contrary to their own Traffic Plan. I feel that this may be a deliberately misleading omission!!

An increase in the numbers of 'Early Learning Students' from 80 to 130 after committing to no increase just last year. These very young students (under 5) have to be driven therefore further increasing the traffic burden on our streets.

I also take objection to giving Approx 3 weeks to review and comment on a 1,600 page DA document really is a blight on our State Planning Department.

I am also concerned about a shadow being cast over Queens Park due to the height of the proposed building increase.

The updated Moriah proposal is substantively the same as previous. The development is far too big, oppressive and ill thought through for a small suburban area already with major peak time traffic issues. The imposing presence of armed security, the ugly nature of a building over looking the Park, the intensification of traffic are all sub optimal. To let this happen would be a blight on Queens Park and a direct imposition on the people who live there. My specific comments are below:

MORIAH COLLEGE REDEVELOPMENT – MAJOR PROJECT 14741
I strongly object to this development as a resident of Queens Park for the following reasons:
1. Traffic congestion is already a major problem particularly between 7:30am and 9:30am and later in the afternoons. There is an almost continuous flow of traffic blocking local streets at peak times generated by student drop-offs and pick-ups.
2. Moriah College has failed to manage its own Transport, Traffic & Parking Plan (TTPP) for a long time, evidenced by the number of students, parents and staff vehicles parking daily in local streets contrary to its own TTPP.
3. Moriah College night-time events are frequent, attract large numbers of people and use local streets for parking. This will only worsen for residents if this proposal is approved.
4. Pedestrian safety risks and general road safety risks will escalate as a result of the increased traffic in local streets.
5. Noise and air pollution in our local streets will increase due to more traffic and people, and as a result, noise will increase and air quality will reduce.
6. The streets of Queens Park are becoming ‘traffic sewers’ which is impacting friendly interaction between neighbours, resulting in a decreased sense of well-being, community, connectedness and security.
7. The visual amenity of Queens Park and Centennial Park will be adversely impacted by the sheer size of the proposed new buildings.
8. It is likely to effect the value of homes in a downward direction and we would reserve our rights on this matter,
9. The ripple-on effect of the increase in traffic, congestion and pollution will extend to many residents who have not been notified of the proposal and who deserve the right to be informed and to comment.
10. The ‘Near Neighbour Letter Catchment’ was inadequate and needs to be significantly expanded so that all impacted neighbours are aware of Moriah’s intentions.
11. Queens Park residents would like Waverley Council to conduct their own independent and public traffic survey so that all stakeholders can better understand the impact.
12. Further to the above standard issues:, we received communication at the time from Moriah (unsigned) from the College President suggesting there is misinformation out there on this project and trying to correct the record. It suggests there has been a lot of community consultation - total rubbish. It also suggests they will get more kids and teachers to ride to school... seriously? The truth is that they don't communicate with us apart from a letterbox drop irregularly that says there is a number of nights when there will be a function on.
13. We put up with aggressive parents blocking our narrow street and refusing to budge when we are trying to go about our business. They sit in their cars, blow their horns and expect us to back up to get out of their way. It would be funny if it wasn't so aggressive.
14. The students park all throughout the neighborhood and even if you tell them they are not supposed to, they sit in their cars watching you, waiting and hoping you'll go away. In the end I do as it's a pointless waste of my time. The school has never policed this.
15. My neighbor who has been here since it became a school said that they originally promised all the same things they are now promising with this development - including access by the community to the pool. All three of our kids were learning to swim when we first moved here in 2010 and we taught them at Hakoah Club in Bondi, at a private swimming school in Rose Bay and at Bronte Beach as nippers. There was no option up the road from us.
16. It is an incredibly closed school that does not try and integrate with the community. Armed security is intimidating and reinforces the view that the school is not for the neighborhood.

My first submission highlighted the blatant disregard by students of the Local area parking restrictions imposed on the school.
This disregard continues.
I strongly request that any approvals be dependent on strict adherence to the local area restrictions.

MORIAH COLLEGE REDEVELOPMENT – MAJOR PROJECT 14741

I strongly object to this development as a resident of Queens Park for the following reasons:

1. The size, scale and bulk of the buildings overlooking Centennial and Queens park are completely out of keeping with the appearance and amenity of the immediate surrounding heritage open parkland area.
2. The school has, via ongoing development, continually increased the number of students using the space and at some point a hard limit needs to be placed so as to stop this creep and associated pressures placed on the surrounding area by increased student and servicing population at the college.
3. Traffic congestion is already a major problem particularly between 7:30am and 9:30am and later in the afternoons. There is an almost continuous flow of traffic blocking local streets at peak times generated by student drop-offs and pick-ups particularly in areas where it is agreed they will not occur.
4. Moriah College has failed to manage its own Transport, Traffic, Parking Plan (TTPP) for a long time, evidenced by the number of students, parents and staff vehicles parking daily in local streets contrary to its own TTPP.
5. Moriah College night-time events are frequent, attract large numbers of people and use local streets for parking. This will only worsen for residents if this proposal is approved.
6. Pedestrian safety risks and general road safety risks will escalate as a result of the increased traffic in local streets.
7. Noise and air pollution in our local streets will increase due to more traffic and people, and as a result, noise will increase and air quality will reduce.
8. The streets of Queens Park are becoming ‘traffic sewers’ which is impacting friendly interaction between neighbours, resulting in a decreased sense of well-being,
community, connectedness and security.
9. The visual amenity of Queens Park and Centennial Park will be adversely impacted by the sheer size of the proposed new buildings.
10. 15 days, especially in the middle of a pandemic, is grossly inadequate for informed responses to the new proposal – more time is needed.
11. The ripple-on effect of the increase in traffic, congestion and pollution will extend to many residents who have not been notified of the proposal and who deserve the
right to be informed and to comment.
13. Queens Park residents would like Waverley Council to conduct their own independent and public traffic survey so that all stakeholders can better understand
the impact.
14. The school has effectively taken ownership of the traffic flow and footpath on Baronga Avenue which is nearly impassable for both traffic and pedestrians when school dropoff and pickup vehicles, buses or students or security guards or faculty are using it. If the entrance is reoriented here this problem will significantly worsen. This is an important public thoroughfare and should be treated as such.
15. The objections to the development overwhelmingly came from local residents. The supporting submissions overwhelmingly came from people outside the area.
16. Bike racks are a furphy. I've never seen a cyclist enter the school. The school is addicted to car transport which places an enormous burden on the streets and parking in the area. And it will continue to do so.
17. I don't understand the role of the Moriah College Consultative Committee now. It seems redundant given the ability of Moriah to ignore any decisions they don't agree with.
18. The traffic plan: No mention of enforcing the plan. Has this been sidelined?
19. Use of the school pool, gym etc: (appendix G) This is not correct. I have tried to get access to the pool and have been told this is not possible by the private operator (prior to Covid). Please explain how access is possible.
20. Visual Impact and Overshadowing – onto Queens Park and Centennial Park: The document justifies the significant visual impact and overshadowing by saying it is less than the original DA. This is like saying a 200 storey building should be approved in Bondi Junction because the DA has been reduced from 210 storeys. I don't understand this argument.
21. Security Guards – Imposing nature of the boundary wall and security guards. Recent developments are that Security Guards are now more active than before. They are now a very visible presence in Queens Park while the students play there. They are also shining torches into cars parked around the school area in the mornings before sunrise. This intimidating behaviour should be stopped.
22. Overshadowing of the ESBS: This has been done at 9am in July. This should also be done from 8am in July as well as 9am in December/January. Logic would show that the reduction of total sunshine to large areas of the ESBS is significant. The statement saying "The majority of the ESBS (to the west) and Queen’s Park (to the east) receives unobstructed sunlight." is very misleading. This is justification to allow a deprivation of light to a minority of the ESBS. If this is done every time Moriah submits a new DA (and they are coming thick and fast), then eventually the whole ESBS will be deprived of sunlight for the majority of the day.
23. Visual Impact: The visual impact will continue to be substantial. There can be no argument here. The original images as seen from Queens Park show the buildings dominating the western section of Queens Park. The amended plans don't appear to change this at all. The earlier DA document represented that the visual impact to the eastern end of Centennial Park would not be significant. You only need to stand in this part of Centennial Park and look across to the school to where the new, large buildings will be to realise this is totally incorrect.
24. Use of Centennial Park as a parking lot by the school. The proximity to the Ian Potter Wild Play garden leaves mothers of small children unable to park to use this amenity as the school parking uses up all of these adjacent spots.
25. The updated Green Travel Plan assesses cycling as a future mode of transport. See 4.1.5 - the Urbis/Moriah response to Waverley Council’s Submission. The measures to minimise traffic impact need a 10% reduction in the post development traffic to retain the status quo so we can expect 1) no improvement on the current situation and 2) post development traffic has to be reduced by 10% to just maintain the current traffic level.
26. Page 22: This proposal is most disrespectful to local residents - Urbis says that traffic through the surrounding road network cannot be directly attributable to the College - and propose that Waverley Council investigates traffic in the surrounding roads (ie in our precinct - our biggest issue) separately with the residents - ie outside the DA process. This seems an absolute flick pass and abrogation of responsibility. The Traffic and Parking Management plan also appears to have changed form and is embedded with general facetious statements such as contained on P35 ‘ measures will be introduced through the Green Travel Plan to discourage; referring also to alternative forms of transports including several references to bikes. The tone is that the new traffic/parking plan discourages as opposed to prohibits students parking in certain streets etc.
27. I could see no reference to staff restrictions.
28. What teeth does the traffic plan (TTPP) have?
This has been changed over time.
The first one included staff in the exclusion zone for parking, dropping off etc.
The second one has introduced a second map for parent drop offs, and excluded staff from the exclusion.
The result is that our streets are getting filled by staff.

This proposal is aggressive and out of keeping with the neighbourhood. It needs to be sent back to the drawing board so that the living conditions desired by local residents and council are considered in the process and the buildings are scaled back to not impact heritage areas and amenity of the local area

MORIAH COLLEGE REDEVELOPMENT – MAJOR PROJECT 14741

I strongly object to this development as a resident of Queens Park for the following reasons:

1. The size, scale and bulk of the buildings overlooking Centennial and Queens park are completely out of keeping with the appearance and amenity of the immediate surrounding heritage open parkland area.
2. The school has, via ongoing development, continually increased the number of students using the space and at some point a hard limit needs to be placed so as to stop this creep and associated pressures placed on the surrounding area by increased student and servicing population at the college.
3. Traffic congestion is already a major problem particularly between 7:30am and 9:30am and later in the afternoons. There is an almost continuous flow of traffic blocking local streets at peak times generated by student drop-offs and pick-ups particularly in areas where it is agreed they will not occur.
4. Moriah College has failed to manage its own Transport, Traffic, Parking Plan (TTPP) for a long time, evidenced by the number of students, parents and staff vehicles parking daily in local streets contrary to its own TTPP.
5. Moriah College night-time events are frequent, attract large numbers of people and use local streets for parking. This will only worsen for residents if this proposal is approved.
6. Pedestrian safety risks and general road safety risks will escalate as a result of the increased traffic in local streets.
7. Noise and air pollution in our local streets will increase due to more traffic and people, and as a result, noise will increase and air quality will reduce.
8. The streets of Queens Park are becoming ‘traffic sewers’ which is impacting friendly interaction between neighbours, resulting in a decreased sense of well-being,
community, connectedness and security.
9. The visual amenity of Queens Park and Centennial Park will be adversely impacted by the sheer size of the proposed new buildings.
10. 15 days, especially in the middle of a pandemic, is grossly inadequate for informed responses to the new proposal – more time is needed.
11. The ripple-on effect of the increase in traffic, congestion and pollution will extend to many residents who have not been notified of the proposal and who deserve the
right to be informed and to comment.
13. Queens Park residents would like Waverley Council to conduct their own independent and public traffic survey so that all stakeholders can better understand
the impact.
14. The school has effectively taken ownership of the traffic flow and footpath on Baronga Avenue which is nearly impassable for both traffic and pedestrians when school dropoff and pickup vehicles, buses or students or security guards or faculty are using it. If the entrance is reoriented here this problem will significantly worsen. This is an important public thoroughfare and should be treated as such.
15. The objections to the development overwhelmingly came from local residents. The supporting submissions overwhelmingly came from people outside the area.
16. Bike racks are a furphy. I've never seen a cyclist enter the school. The school is addicted to car transport which places an enormous burden on the streets and parking in the area. And it will continue to do so.
17. I don't understand the role of the Moriah College Consultative Committee now. It seems redundant given the ability of Moriah to ignore any decisions they don't agree with.
18. The traffic plan: No mention of enforcing the plan. Has this been sidelined?
19. Use of the school pool, gym etc: (appendix G) This is not correct. I have tried to get access to the pool and have been told this is not possible by the private operator (prior to Covid). Please explain how access is possible.
20. Visual Impact and Overshadowing – onto Queens Park and Centennial Park: The document justifies the significant visual impact and overshadowing by saying it is less than the original DA. This is like saying a 200 storey building should be approved in Bondi Junction because the DA has been reduced from 210 storeys. I don't understand this argument.
21. Security Guards – Imposing nature of the boundary wall and security guards. Recent developments are that Security Guards are now more active than before. They are now a very visible presence in Queens Park while the students play there. They are also shining torches into cars parked around the school area in the mornings before sunrise. This intimidating behaviour should be stopped.
22. Overshadowing of the ESBS: This has been done at 9am in July. This should also be done from 8am in July as well as 9am in December/January. Logic would show that the reduction of total sunshine to large areas of the ESBS is significant. The statement saying "The majority of the ESBS (to the west) and Queen’s Park (to the east) receives unobstructed sunlight." is very misleading. This is justification to allow a deprivation of light to a minority of the ESBS. If this is done every time Moriah submits a new DA (and they are coming thick and fast), then eventually the whole ESBS will be deprived of sunlight for the majority of the day.
23. Visual Impact: The visual impact will continue to be substantial. There can be no argument here. The original images as seen from Queens Park show the buildings dominating the western section of Queens Park. The amended plans don't appear to change this at all. The earlier DA document represented that the visual impact to the eastern end of Centennial Park would not be significant. You only need to stand in this part of Centennial Park and look across to the school to where the new, large buildings will be to realise this is totally incorrect.
24. Use of Centennial Park as a parking lot by the school. The proximity to the Ian Potter Wild Play garden leaves mothers of small children unable to park to use this amenity as the school parking uses up all of these adjacent spots.
25. The updated Green Travel Plan assesses cycling as a future mode of transport. See 4.1.5 - the Urbis/Moriah response to Waverley Council’s Submission. The measures to minimise traffic impact need a 10% reduction in the post development traffic to retain the status quo so we can expect 1) no improvement on the current situation and 2) post development traffic has to be reduced by 10% to just maintain the current traffic level.
26. Page 22: This proposal is most disrespectful to local residents - Urbis says that traffic through the surrounding road network cannot be directly attributable to the College - and propose that Waverley Council investigates traffic in the surrounding roads (ie in our precinct - our biggest issue) separately with the residents - ie outside the DA process. This seems an absolute flick pass and abrogation of responsibility. The Traffic and Parking Management plan also appears to have changed form and is embedded with general facetious statements such as contained on P35 ‘ measures will be introduced through the Green Travel Plan to discourage; referring also to alternative forms of transports including several references to bikes. The tone is that the new traffic/parking plan discourages as opposed to prohibits students parking in certain streets etc.
27. I could see no reference to staff restrictions.
28. What teeth does the traffic plan (TTPP) have?
This has been changed over time.
The first one included staff in the exclusion zone for parking, dropping off etc.
The second one has introduced a second map for parent drop offs, and excluded staff from the exclusion.
The result is that our streets are getting filled by staff.

This proposal is aggressive and out of keeping with the neighbourhood. It needs to be sent back to the drawing board so that the living conditions desired by local residents and council are considered in the process and the buildings are scaled back to not impact heritage areas and amenity of the local area

I am a Queens Park resident near the college and remain very concerned about the traffic impact. The modelling provided suggests that the traffic is going to get appreciably worse and a number of important intersections thoroughly gridlocked in the before and after school period. The approach in the traffic report seems to be that as the projected position without the changes is already bad, in LOS F, that somehow makes the impact of the proposal OK as the position will remain in the same category. However that is the worst category and while the category may not change the modelling suggests things will get much more congested.

Given the distance from the train station I am sceptical that there will be much of a shift away from driving and the traffic report conclusions seem highly dependent on adoption of the green plan and getting a 10 % mode shift. The green plan itself says a 3-5% shift is generally regarded as a significant shift yet then goes on to assume 10%. If that isnt delivered then local traffic will go from currently bad to terrible.

The school already has substantial numbers and despite the references to a 15 year period for the increase more than half the increase in numbers is at year 5. The response document doesn't reply adaquately on why an increase in numbers is warranted yet many of the difficulties with the proposal seem to derive from the increase.

Generally it was clear from the response document that there is council and local resident concern about traffic, parking and the increase in numbers. Little has been done in the updates to the proposal to address these resident concerns.

I think any increase in numbers on the site should be made conditional on demonstrable success with the traffic and green plan such that the performance of the nearby intersections is not impacted as badly as is shown in the traffic modelling. Otherwise residents will be left with traffic problems for years to come.

Re development proposal SSD-10352. I have reviewed the changes and I do not believe that they address any community concerns raised when the SSD & EIS were exhibited
last year. In my view the Scale of the Proposed Buildings along Baronga Ave and opposite Queens Park would more than double the height permitted for that site, and would not be sympathetic to the surrounding area. The roads surrounding the college are already hazardous so further changes are likely to increase the risks to pedestrians and driver
safety and impede traffic flow. It is important that the traffic inYork Road doesn't get any more congested or that vehicles try to "rat run" through nearby streets.
Additionally, the revised proposal makes no concession to the proposed increase in student numbers. Note that when the College first moved to this site, the community was assured that the school would be limited to 610 students
During the years of the College's operation and huge expansion, the local community has had to put up with an enormous increase in traffic and congestion associated with the school. Given this, I urge you to consider the impact of this massive redevelopment proposal on our residential community and the park and request that there be a substantial reduction in the scale of the buildings and student numbers.

See attached.

See attached.

To follow up my previous submission I have noticed that appropriately 90% responses in favour of this build are not Queens Park residents so naturally this does not affect them.

Second campus is the only way ahead.

No expansion to Moriah College is required.
No evidence that student numbers will increase.
Historical records indicate no growth in student numbers.

In planning submissions to date no detailed evidence has been provided if Moriah College requires the additional capacity. Staff and student numbers at Moriah College for the last seven do not indicate any real growth.

A detailed investigation of local demographics and sources of potential students is required.

See attached.

I object to the proposal.
My reasons are contained in the objection submitted to DPIE by the Queens Park Precinct Executive Committee on 16 July 2020.
My objection is based on the reasons that have been provided in the Committee's submission,

I object to the proposal for the reasons contained in the submission dated 16 July 2020 prepared by the Queens Park Precinct Executive Committee, copy attached.