Trinity Grammar School Redevelopment

I object to the proposal on the grounds that the increase in Student and Supporting Staff numbers will adversely impact the surrounding local traffic and pedestrian safety

The proposal as it stands claims an improvement to the local traffic management but I believe does not adequately address the increase is traffic movements in the local area outside of the immediate streets and the reduction of the ratio of spaces to the newly proposed student and staff numbers.
As shown in the attached picture (Victoria St & Seaview St), there is a current traffic issue with the current student numbers and associated vehicle movements that is impacting local traffic flow through. Even with an intended 'better flow' in the underground car parks of this development i believe that there will still be an increase volume of movements to and from Victoria St and surrounding streets held up on the top streets causing the same if not greater traffic impacts.

The proposal of removing or altering the Traffic Island of Victoria St to allow truck access to the New Oval 3 car park from the local neighborhood streets is also of concern. This traffic island is a pedestrian safety feature on a very busy street due to the current traffic from Trinity itself. The idea of removing this or turning into a 'painted'version removes a pedestrian safety feature from Victoria St which is claimed to be improved by this development. It is also of concern that Seaview St will now have a larger loading dock for deliveries on a narrow road close to an intersection that is also a suburban bus route that currently requires vehicles to pull over to allow buses and trucks to pass. It leaves the feeling that the surrounding roads are more a driveway to the school at times rather than a public road.

My recommendation is to refuse the increase of student and associated staff numbers of this development as it has not been shown to be adequately accounted for in the traffic and pedestrian management plan, as it addresses the current numbers not the requested increase.

I object to Trinity Grammar School's proposed development application because the traffic at the moment in the mornings and the afternoons is horrendous. I leave at 8am to drop off my daugthers to school in Five Dock and I daily stuck in a traffic jam outside the school for at least 5 minutes - which delays my girls getting to school on time. Whether I leave at 7:50, 7:55, 8:05 or 8:10 - the traffic jam is always there! In the afternoons, the same situation and at times worse. Most afternoons I cannot even get into my driveway because there is a traffic build-up all the way down to Yeo Park Infants and also the opposite end past Cardinal Retirement Village. This is every school day! The fact that Trinity Grammar is proposing this new building work is to also increase the number of students at the school. We currently have a huge traffic situation at the moment which will only get worse when they increase the number of students.

Another issue is the build up of trucks in Victoria Street when the building works begin. We went through this a few years ago with the last building works undertaken at the school. The noise the trucks create very early in the morning (earlier than 6am) is not acceptable. They line up outside our house and make considerable noise when coming and going. The building works will also cause major disruption to the current traffic situation.

I object to the the development proposal of the Trinity Grammar School Redevelopment due to the increase in traffic which has become worse over the past couple of years and the extensive building works which will intensify this .

As a local resident I am very concerned about this proposal. I have a young family and we use Yeo Park on an almost daily basis. Me and my young kids walk, scooter ride and bike ride along Victoria Street daily. We also use Harland Street, Seaview Street and Queen Street. Currently, without these additions Trinity is proposing, the traffic in the area is extremely concerning. Especially in the early afternoon, exactly the time that hundreds of local young families and children are using Yeo Park and the surrounding streets. The Park is a public area, utilised by the community. It has a public infant’s school in it. I feel this proposal has the potential to further overshadow the park and put its users at risk. Trying to cross Victoria Street in the afternoon is nearly impossible. I cannot see why plans to add more traffic, to an already extremely congested area, right next to an infant’s school and a very popular park would be approved.

My concern centres around the fact that Trinity want to add 40% more students (+600, from 1500 to 2100). 40% more students will surely equate to 40% more traffic in the area, which given the current traffic congestion, is a real concern. They also want to only add 12 more carspaces, which falls well below recommendations and will likely force hundreds of cars onto the surrounding streets.

Also of concern is the new delivery depots off Seaview Street and Victoria Street (near Harland Street) which will result in the pedestrian refuge on Victoria Street near Harland Street being removed. Removing a pedestrian refuge opposite a large popular public park and an infant’s schools, I feel is wrong. This proposal puts the comfort and safety of the local community in jeopardy, just so a private school can make more profit.

Trinity did not assess the impact of their proposal on traffic on Queen Street or Harland street or Service Avenue. This is probably because if they did it would be guaranteed to be very negative. So they just left this crucial part out of their proposal. I cannot see how this proposal can even be considered without this crucial assessment.

Trinity and Yeo Park are surrounded by low rise residential properties, many of which are of significant historical importance. The proposal to build a new 5 story teaching and learning centre and a pavilion near Yeo Park is concerning and would no doubt significantly reduce the heritage appeal of the area.

Yeo Park and the surrounding areas are of significant historical importance. Trinity is completely surrounded by Heritage Conservation Areas including the Service Avenue Heritage Conservation Area, the Harland Estate Heritage Conservation Area, the Ambleside and Holwood Heritage Conservation Area, the Victoria Square Heritage Conservation Area and the Prospect Hall Heritage Conservation Area. This area is incredibly important to residents of the Inner West and is somewhere locals enjoy spending time, exercising and enjoying the outdoors. This proposal has the potential to impinge on this enjoyment and the utilisation of the park by locals. Recently Planning and Public Spaces Minister Rob Stokes highlighted the chronic shortage of green space and safe and accessible recreational areas in the Inner West, including parks, cycleways and pedestrian paths. Government figures show the average green space access is 75 square metres per person across the Greater Sydney region, whereas in the Inner West it is 12 square metres per person. Mr Stokes has said that he favours creating safer and "more interesting pedestrianised landscapes"(1). This would be ideal for Victoria Street and supports Council and Trinity’s Green Travel Policy encouraging community access to Yeo Park. In contrast, one Private School plans to do the opposite and I cannot see how this can be approved.

1. https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/rush-to-parks-cycleways-during-shutdown-reveals-sydney-s-great-divide-20200428-p54nzl.html

Please see attached letter setting out the major objections to the Trinity School expansion

My concerns
Traffic congestion, parents dropping, delivery vans and buses
Increase in number of students to 2,000. This is contrary to Land and Enviroment Court determination that it was not in the public interest to exceed 1,500 students
I have no objection to improving facilities

see attached submission

see attached pdf file for my comments

With regard to the proposed development at Trinity Grammar School, I wish to object to
this proposal on the basis of the unacceptable traffic impacts which would severely and
materially impact upon the residents of the surrounding neighbourhood(s).
Furthermore the installation of a delivery dock and loss of street trees on Seaview Street
would materially impact upon the not only the safety of residents, vehicular passengers and
pedestrians using the street but also the amenity and contribution to streetscape afforded
by the existing landscaped public land and street trees which serve to ameliorate against
the ever-increasing bulk and scale of the school as it presents to Seaview Street.

Any proposed increase in student numbers would surely cause an increase in vehicle
movements in and out of the school above that which already results in heavy traffic
congestion on Victoria and Seaview Street as well as Prospect Road and surrounding
streets. The existing congestion is in no way mitigated by the current arrangement of
cars being marshalled in to and out of the underground carpark and drop-off / pick-up
facility. In fact the congestion on the entry ramp is one of the chief causes of traffic being
gridlocked in both directions along Victoria Street, usually for hundreds of metres, which
then impedes traffic on Seaview and Harland Street and Holwood Avenue. This, in
combination with the movement of both Trinity School buses to and from the site as well
as commuters attempting to 'rat-run' through the area makes it a very dangerous area for
both drivers and pedestrians. Added to this are the senior Trinity Grammar students who
insist upon making a 'U-turn' in the middle of Holwood Avenue and it can be seen each
school day that the traffic impacts caused by the school have gone from bad to worse.

On a weekly basis for the past ten years I have witnessed drivers resorting to unlawful and
dangerous driving on the wrong side of Victoria Street in order to make their commute
through this congestion. Often I have seen cars dangerously stopped, partially to the side of
Victoria Street to drop off or pick up Trinity students ahead of the entrance, presumably to save
parents the time spent entering and departing the school. I have long been concerned for
the safety of pedestrians, in particular the children of the neighbourhood who must navigate
through this gridlocked traffic and poor driving on what is otherwise a local street as they
walk to and from public transport in order to get to and from surrounding schools in the area.

The impact of Trinity Grammar School at its current size with regard to traffic congestion is
already untenable. The school is already beyond the limits of what could be considered a
reasonable use of the site. Any proposal to increase the size of the school and therefore the
volume of traffic generated, loss of trees and landscaped open space should be considered
in relation to the impacts upon the local residents. Given the fact that these impacts are
already a major risk to the safety and amenity of residents, the proposal is not in the
public interest and the proposed development proposal should be refused on these grounds.
The health, safety and amenity of surrounding residents must not be impacted any further
by endless expansion of the school at this congested site. The reasonable yield of the site
for this use has already been exceeded. For the above reasons I strongly object to this
development proposal and request that the matter be given serious consideration by the
relevant stautory authorities responsible for planning and environment. There needs to be a
fair and reasonable balance struck between the interests of the school as property owner and
those of the public in terms of the health, safety and amenity of local residents.

This proposal has been developed to cater to the needs of a student population not resident in the Ashfield / Summer Hill area. As I have witnessed in the past, they lack a positive commitment to the amenity of the area.
This proposal nominates a substantial increase to the student population and staff numbers. This increase then escalates traffic flow through the residential streets and monopolises the available free parking.
As a resident of Hurlstone Avenue not only do, I suffer the increasing demands placed by Trinity Grammar I suffer the increased traffic generated by cross city motorists looking to avoid congested arterial roads. Inner West Council should introduce a traffic management system like Erskinville and Newtown isolating residential streets for residential traffic.
Parking in the streets adjacent to Trinity should not be factored into this proposal as overflow from their onsite parking. The activities of daily residential life require this common facility be available for many and varied purposes.
As this proposal has stages documented to develop over many years there will be long periods of time when the Colleges onsite parking will not be accessible, I see no proposal to accommodate this situation. To this, is added the additional requirements for construction workers. The proposal has no commitment to solve these issues. The Traffic Management Plan only encourages workers to travel to and from the site via active and sustainable transport while the Green Travel Plan will encourage travel behaviour change for the students, family members and staff. These are words not a plan.

Having lived in the area for many years I’m aware the school has not achieved a satisfactory level of commitment from its’ patrons, staff and students to using the Kiss & Ride facility, courteous parking nor safe driving practice.

Please see attached file.

I understand that the limit for Trinity grammar students was maintained at 1500 in 2015, yet i am informed that they already have 1655 students and now wish to increase this to 2100. I live in a street adjacent to Trinity and I'm very concerned about the current level of traffic in the streets surrounding the school at the start and end of the school day. An increase of 30% in student numbers will obviously make this much worse. trinity is situated on two residential streets and many surrounding quiet residential streets suddenly become major thoroughfare at these times, yet without crossings, traffic restrictions or traffic calming measures in place.

Allowing the site to become a major construction site for a number of years will of course make this problem worse. I also note that this is s residential area with no building above 3 storeys situated nearby. A 5 storey building is therefore out of character with the nature of the borough. For these reasons I object to this proposal.

As a long term resident of Victoria Street. Ashfield I object to Trinity Grammar Schools proposed development proposal for several reasons.
See points below:

• The school has already undergone a significant development recently which included the increase in student numbers.
• The impact of increased traffic in the area for not only the local residents. This traffic is not conducive to a safe environment for all including the pupils at the infants school.
• Victoria Street now has a council run café which due to the fact it is a Cul de Sac has increased traffic and parking . The increased volume of students will increase traffic.
• Exiting or entering Victoria Street during peak hours in the morning when school starts/early morning extra curricular activities start and mid afternoon and ends is difficult and often chaotic.
• Trinity Grammar students do not use public transport, I personally having lived here for 15 years never seen a Trinity Grammar student walk to school or wait at a public bus stop. Students often drive or parents transport their children and with the current climate this is unlikely to change.
• The first I heard as a resident of the development was at the start of May 2000 when a letter was put in the letter box (whilst in lockdown for COVID).
“Feedback was received directly from neighbours during the door-knocks, telephone and email enquiries, in person at the community drop-ins, and via feedback forms (Appendix H) and was recorded in the stakeholder contact database. Consultation identified key issues of community interest for consideration during the preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement”.
Looking at the plan the “door knock” only went as far as 208 Victoria street right outside the school. This was no use to anyone who lived further down to the Cul de Sac and have to pass the school to access their residence.

• The height of the building- 5 stories is not in keeping with the heritage area.
• The school site is decreasing the residences in the area and therefore changing the the overall aesthetics resulting in an overdevelopment of the site.
• Disruption to local residents with the ongoing construction work.

My objections are:-
Traffic-1
Additional students equates to additional parents driving their children to and from school. It is already at chaos level . The streets are too narrow to cater for this level of traffic already which causes significant delay and distress to residents. The streets can not cope with the number of cars presently - and I am referring to pre Covid times - . All the streets leading off Victoria street are too narrow and only suitable for local traffic. The intersection of Victoria street and Liverpool road becomes very congested which would interfere with emergency services. The school needs to introduce an exit now onto Prospect road to take some of the strain. For several hours every morning and afternoon traffic chaos occurs for which Trinity has no control. This is a serious problem.
Help
Traffic -2
Parking in school grounds should be increased to allow for the extra staff and visitors associated with any increase in school numbers.The available public transport is inadequate and staff will drive. This is the reality .
This will place more pressure on the surrounding streets creating more chaos.

Residential area! Trinity should be regarded as a business and all planning decisions should be based upon this presumption. It draws its students from all over Sydney. It is located in the heart of a residential area far removed from convenient transport to those areas. Why should local residents suffer disruption to the peaceful enjoyment of their homes because a business wants to expand.













There is traffic chaos at drop off and pick uptimes . It impacts my ability to exit my driveway in the afternoon as parents wait in my street until they are able to enter school grounds.
It impacts

This development should not go ahead

I believe Trinity Grammar need to build an additional school somewhere else. It is clear (to me) from the previous and repeated ongoing proposed development applications that the existing school site does not accommodate their current requirements or their seemingly ever increasing school numbers. At present the only solution they (Trinity Grammar) seem to have is to just continue to increase the size of the school by construction and demolition and not ever face the fact that to have the least impact on the environment, the heritage of the area and the congestion in the local community they need to take up an additional residence elsewhere. That is, a location or site that is purpose built or large enough to meet their future needs for a century or more and not just look to the next four years.

Their continued development and the current proposal change( forever )the look and feel of the area which includes the much referred to and lauded but increasingly hard to protect heritage listed Abergeldie Estate and the surrounds of the estate. The construction work is not one off and is just ongoing and continues with each submission. None of the work or the subsequent work is short term or minor. The construction does not have an end date because the alternative to expansion does not have a start date.
Each submission by Trinity Grammar just seems to have the next date that a resident or the Council have to take up the fight and object to.

The growth of Trinity Grammar School impacts on the local community negatively in terms of general congestion, traffic congestion and the look and feel of the suburb. The problems caused by the development and changes never go away they just continue to be a problem that the local community and long term residents are expected to deal with and have to fight all the time. Build another School somewhere else on a suitable site and stop impacting on the local community is my submission. The current proposal includes the further demolition of two dwelling houses again forever changing the visual harmony and amenity of the area. I have long bemoaned the impact of adverse development in my area but this is my first submission. I feel so strongly about this latest application by Trinity Grammar that I am finally puting in a submission requesting it to be stopped.

The traffic congestion caused by the increased number of school buses impacts on the much valued (locally) Yeo Park. On any given day 4-5 buses park one behind each other (along Old Canterbury Road) from as early as 1pm taking all available parking places that would accommodate parking for other users of the park. Further buses also park on the opposite side of Old Canterbury Road near the intersection of Arlington Street (on the rise) causing further traffic congestion and loss of vision to pedestrians. Trying to cross over Old Canterbury Road as a pedestrian is impossible with the buses banked up waiting to eventually make their way into Prospect Road and Seaview Street. Once the buses are in Prospect Road or Seaview Street they are lined up again and compete with the hundreds of cars arriving to collect children. As a pedestrian my experience is that the traffic congestion caused by the huge school is chaotic and dangerous. I can no longer walk safely with two senior dogs and feel I have to avoid the area for several hours of every day not just school days. I have lived in the area and walked in Summer Hill for over 30 years and have never seen the congestion as bad as it is. I no longer feel safe walking around the perimeter of Yeo Park. In Seaview Street at the entrance to the School I feel harried and singled out by by security guards trying to beckon me (a pedestrian) forward to walk toward the park and past the school car park entrance. I've had a number of near misses which contributes to my unease in being able to enjoy the closest public park to where I live. The greatest (negative) impact is on the local residents, the Council and the ratepayer who derive no benefit from the growth of the school. The number of students being ferried away by bus and car indicates that the students enrolled in the school do not live locally (are not residents or ratepayers) and that the school is not situated near accessible trains or adequate commuter parking. The congestion caused by the cars and buses leaving Prospect Road, Hurlstone Avenue and Seaview Street is horrendous. The general vehicle traffic travelling at excessive speed (in excess of the posted speed limit) north and south on Old Canterbury Road which is reflected in the constant appearance of the mobile speed detection vehicle situated between Prospect Road, Hurlstone Avenue, Dixson Avenue and Arlington Street adds weight to my submission that to further increase any traffic congestion it to further increase the hazard to pedestrians and road users. The congested and heavy traffic conditions can cause motorists to make often ill fated decisions. The roadways around Trinity Grammar School fall right into the heart of the congestion of a triangle along Old Canterbury Road and mentioned above as a hazard for road users including myself as a pedestrian. Adding to this congestion by allowing this further expansion is in my opinion folly. In this same area was the location of another sad fatality of a road user being a motor cyclist at the corner of Old Canterbury Road and Dixson Avenue which is in the centre of some (but not all) of the congestion caused by traffic (buses included) leaving Trinity Grammar. This is an area I have personal testimony as to any number of near misses. Any further congestion by increasing the capacity of the school will continue to exacerbate the current problem,. Increasing the building works and increasing the school student numbers does not address any of those problems and only adds to the problem. I strongly believe that Trinity Grammar need to stop expansion on the existing site and look and build an additional school on a different site in an area that supports transport links to their student residential base.

Trinity has already had recent developments and does not need to make such a large increase in its student body or add large incongruous buildings to its site. The school already impacts on the public spaces around it and the availability of parking as well as traffic congestion.

Ausgrid notes the requirement for additional load to the development and recommends the proponent make the necessary connection application to Ausgrid as soon as practicable.
Ausgrid has 33,000V cables buried along Prospect road and suitable precautions should be adopted by the development regarding the construction and ongoing operation of the facility in the vicinity of these cables.

26 May 2020
Social and Infrastructure Assessments
Locked Bag 5022
Parramatta NSW 2124

Re: SSD 10371 – The Renewal Project – Trinity Grammar School (TGS)
119 Prospect Road Summer Hill

We have reviewed the SSD 10371 plans and object to the development. We note, as usual an absence of community consultation by the TGS. We object to the SSD for a number of reasons.
1. The proposed increase in student numbers of 445 students and 44 staff will increase the burden on the school environs by approximately a quarter, with impacts on the local community. A burden that has grown over the past two decades – see our letter of concern of 2007 (attached).
2. The justification for the growth in student numbers is not sustainable. The EIS claims that an additional 1500 non-government school places are required in the Inner West by 2031 (see EIS page 47); this is used to justify TGS claiming responsibility for 30 per cent of that increase (445/1500= 30 per cent). However, a Private Schools Guide lists over thirty such non-government schools currently operating in the inner west (https://privateschoolsguide.com/sydney-inner-west-private-schools?limitstart=30). So, pro rata, TGS could claim to be responsible for one thirtieth (or 3 per cent) of the growth.
3. The size of the student body has been growing significantly over time and has resulted in increased traffic and parking issues. Today, by chance, a school parent parked across my drive would not move when asked (politely) saying “everyone does it” and not caring when I stated I would complain to the school. Parents will use Prospect Road (and other streets), rather than the school carparks provided (for their convenience) and the TGS fails to police the issue – unlike other schools in the inner west, such as PLC Sydney.
4. The introduction of a junior school playground in Seaview Street will impose new near-daily noise on the adjacent residential community creating a loss of amenity.
We request that a decision is made for refusal of (a) the increase in student numbers and (b) the placement of the new playground opposite residences.
Yours sincerely

Professor Richard P. Mattick and Mrs Susan Mattick

Please see attachment below, raising concerns with the proposal

See attached.