USYD Camperdown-Darlington Campus Improvement Program

Dear Mr McManus



University of Sydney's Campus Improvement Program 2014-2020 State Significant Development (SSD 6123)

I am writing to object to the University of Sydney's Campus Improvement Program 2014-2020 State Significant Development (SSD 6123).

The University of Sydney has not complied with the Director General's Requirements which were requested from the Department of Planning in September 2013.

In the Director-General's Requirements there is a requirement which says "During the preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), consultation must be undertaken with the relevant Commonwealth Government, State or local authorities, service providers, community groups and affected landowners. In particular you must consult with: RAIDD - Residents Acting In Darlington's Defence."

In the EIS Section 10.2 it states ""The University has been engaging with the local community throughout 2013 on the Darlington Campus Abercrombie Redevelopment Project. This has resulted in meetings with key stakeholders and local community with the University providing regular communication regarding the development of the Business School, the Abercrombie Student Accommodation project and the Darlington Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Strategy. Details of these community stakeholders can be found at Appendix N."

Section 10.2 then goes on to state "Through this engagement the University has been able to identify the major issues of importance to the community in relation to the operations of the University". However, at no stage in this engagement was there any mention by the University representatives present that they were trying "to identify the major issues of importance to the community in relation to the operations of the University" nor was there any mention of the Campus Improvement Program (CIP). The engagement was specifically about the development of the Business School, the Abercrombie Student Accommodation project and the Darlington Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Strategy.

Section 10.2 of the EIS then goes on to say "These issues have all been considered and provided for in the development of the CIP through the following inclusions detailed in Table 11". Table 11 then has 2 columns: one headed "Issue Raised" which lists the things the University has identified as issues for the community (without having checked these with the community); and one headed "CIP Response" which is presumably how the University will address those issues, which it itself has identified, in the CIP.

This table is included to address another requirement laid down by the Director-General that "The EIS must describe the consultation process and the issues raised, and identify where the design of the development has been amended in response to these issues. Where amendments have not been made to address an issue, a short explanation should be provided."

Clearly, the intention of Section 10.2 of the EIS is to convince the Department that the University has complied with the Director-General's Requirements and has consulted with RAIDD in regard to the preparation of the EIS. However, no such consultation has ever taken place.

When members of RAIDD wrote to the Vice-Chancellor to complain about their names being listed in the CIS as having been consulted when they had not, the Vice-Chancellor replied quoting the first paragraph of Section 10.2 and saying "There is no suggestion that these community stakeholders were being consulted about the CIP in this reference".

Clearly, the Vice-Chancellor agrees with us that the local community has not been consulted in the preparation of the EIS and that the University has therefore not met the condition of the Director-General's Requirements which directed the University to consult with RAIDD (amongst others) in the preparation of the EIS.

Because of this I submit that this Development Application should not be considered by the Department of Planning and Infrastructure. The University should be instructed to abide by the Director-General's Requirements and consult properly with the local community, taking into account any issues raised and demonstrating changes made to address each issue, before resubmitting a new State Significant Development Application to the Department.


Sincerely yours


Liam Murphy

Dear Peter,





University of Sydney's Campus Improvement Program 2014-2020 State Significant Development (SSD 6123)



While you were on leave, RAIDD was informed by David Gibson that the Department of Planning would accept submissions in regard to this application for a short time after the closing date of 28 February 2014.

I am writing now to object to the University of Sydney's Campus Improvement Program 2014-2020 State Significant Development (SSD 6123).

The University of Sydney has not complied with the Director General's Requirements which were requested from the Department of Planning in September 2013.

In the Director-General's Requirements documents there is a requirement which says "During the preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), consultation must be undertaken with the relevant Commonwealth Government, State or local authorities, service providers, community groups and affected landowners. In particular you must consult with: ...RAIDD - Residents Acting In Darlington's Defence."

In the EIS itself at Section 10.2 it states ""The University has been engaging with the local community throughout 2013 on the Darlington Campus Abercrombie Redevelopment Project. This has resulted in meetings with key stakeholders and local community with the University providing regular communication regarding the development of the Business School, the Abercrombie Student Accommodation project and the Darlington Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Strategy. Details of these community stakeholders can be found at Appendix N."

Section 10.2 then goes on to state "Through this engagement the University has been able to identify the major issues of importance to the community in relation to the operations of the University". However, at no stage in this engagement was there any mention by the University representatives present that they were trying "to identify the major issues of importance to the community in relation to the operations of the University" nor was there any mention of the Campus Improvement Program (CIP). The engagement was specifically about the development of the Business School, the Abercrombie Student Accommodation project and the Darlington Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Strategy.

Section 10.2 of the EIS then goes on to say "These issues have all been considered and provided for in the development of the CIP through the following inclusions detailed in Table 11". Table 11 then has 2 columns: one headed "Issue Raised" which lists the things the University has identified as issues for the community (without having checked these with the community); and one headed "CIP Response" which is presumably how the University will address those issues, which it itself has identified, in the CIP.

This table is included to address another requirement laid down by the Director-General that "The EIS must describe the consultation process and the issues raised, and identify where the design of the development has been amended in response to these issues. Where amendments have not been made to address an issue, a short explanation should be provided."

Clearly, the intention of Section 10.2 of the EIS is to convince the Department that the University has complied with the Director-General's Requirements and has consulted with RAIDD in regard to the preparation of the EIS. However, no such consultation has ever taken place.

When members of RAIDD wrote to the Vice-Chancellor to complain about their names being listed in the CIS as having been consulted when they had not, the Vice-Chancellor replied quoting the first paragraph of Section 10.2 and saying "There is no suggestion that these community stakeholders were being consulted about the CIP in this reference".

Clearly, the Vice-Chancellor agrees with us that the local community has not been consulted in the preparation of the EIS and that the University has therefore not met the condition of the Director-General's Requirements which directed the University to consult with RAIDD (amongst others) in the preparation of the EIS.

Because of this I submit that this Development Application should not be considered by the Department of Planning and Infrastructure. The University should be instructed to abide by the Director-General's Requirements and consult properly with the local community, taking into account any issues raised and showing the changes made to address each issue, before resubmitting a new State Significant Development Application to the Department.


Regards,

Bernice Johnston

Dear Mr McManus


University of Sydney's Campus Improvement Program 2014-2020 State Significant Development (SSD 6123)

Thank you for the extension of time to lodge my objections to SSDD 6123.

I am a resident of Calder Rd Darlington and I am writing to you to object to the University of Sydney's Campus Improvement Program 2014-2020 State Significant Development (SSD 6123).

Because the university has not consulted with me or other community members I will be making further objections once I have had time to study this massive over-development in full.

The University of Sydney has not complied with the Director General's Requirements which were requested from the Department of Planning in September 2013.

In the Director-General's Requirements there is a requirement which says "During the preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), consultation must be undertaken with the relevant Commonwealth Government, State or local authorities, service providers, community groups and affected landowners. In particular you must consult with: RAIDD - Residents Acting In Darlington's Defence."

In the EIS Section 10.2 it states ""The University has been engaging with the local community throughout 2013 on the Darlington Campus Abercrombie Redevelopment Project. This has resulted in meetings with key stakeholders and local community with the University providing regular communication regarding the development of the Business School, the Abercrombie Student Accommodation project and the Darlington Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Strategy. Details of these community stakeholders can be found at Appendix N."

Section 10.2 then goes on to state "Through this engagement the University has been able to identify the major issues of importance to the community in relation to the operations of the University". However, at no stage in this engagement was there any mention by the University representatives present that they were trying "to identify the major issues of importance to the community in relation to the operations of the University" nor was there any mention of the Campus Improvement Program (CIP). The engagement was specifically about the development of the Business School, the Abercrombie Student Accommodation project and the Darlington Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Strategy.

Section 10.2 of the EIS then goes on to say "These issues have all been considered and provided for in the development of the CIP through the following inclusions detailed in Table 11". Table 11 then has 2 columns: one headed "Issue Raised" which lists the things the University has identified as issues for the community (without having checked these with the community); and one headed "CIP Response" which is presumably how the University will address those issues, which it itself has identified, in the CIP.

This table is included to address another requirement laid down by the Director-General that "The EIS must describe the consultation process and the issues raised, and identify where the design of the development has been amended in response to these issues. Where amendments have not been made to address an issue, a short explanation should be provided."

Clearly, the intention of Section 10.2 of the EIS is to convince the Department that the University has complied with the Director-General's Requirements and has consulted with RAIDD in regard to the preparation of the EIS. However, no such consultation has ever taken place.

When members of RAIDD wrote to the Vice-Chancellor to complain about their names being listed in the CIS as having been consulted when they had not, the Vice-Chancellor replied quoting the first paragraph of Section 10.2 and saying "There is no suggestion that these community stakeholders were being consulted about the CIP in this reference".

Clearly, the Vice-Chancellor agrees with us that the local community has not been consulted in the preparation of the EIS and that the University has therefore not met the condition of the Director-General's Requirements which directed the University to consult with RAIDD (amongst others) in the preparation of the EIS.

Because of this I submit that this Development Application should not be considered by the Department of Planning and Infrastructure. The University should be instructed to abide by the Director-General's Requirements and consult properly with the local community, taking into account any issues raised and demonstrating changes made to address each issue, before resubmitting a new State Significant Development Application to the Department.

Sincerely yours


Jim Fleming

Dear Madam and Sirs,

Please register my concern about the proposal to demolish The Eucalypt Grove on the western side of Shepherd Street. Please consider other floor space options for the university to expand into. Our suburb needs to keep as many green buffer zones as it can.

Yours Sincerely

Erica Cordell

Dear Mr McManus

We are residents of Darlington. I appreciate the position of Sydney University as the major resident of the suburb. A small suburb has been made much smaller by the gradual acquisition of property by Sydney University over a number of years.

The University now wishes to expand its vertical footprint on a low rise terrace suburb.

Any increase in building heights should be restricted.

We are particular concerned with the University's plan to cut down the grove of trees on Shepherd St and replace them with a multi storey building. This would turn Shepherd St into a veritable Berlin Wall of concrete facades along Shepherd St.

The building would overlook and tower over one of the few intact 19th Century terrace zones in the city. It would act as a template for the redevelopment for the rest of Shepherd St to the detriment of the whole neighbourhood.

Sydney University should be protecting the environment. The destruction of any grove of trees in our tight urban environment should not be proposed by an organisation that is at the forefront environmental science.

Please re-evaluate and change this poor plan.

Yours Faithfully

Harry & Sophia Alexander

Dear Mr McManus,

I wish to object most strenuously to the most recent development plan submitted by the University of Sydney for the development of its city campus.

It submitted this application without adequate notification to local residents, or interested others, attempting as previously to acquire planning permission unbeknownst to local people.

I have been objecting for many years to the destruction of green areas on the campus, and the replacing of native vegetation by buildings and hard landscaping. Almost all open space on the Darllngton and main campus is now thoroughfare with concrete and mown grass. Native trees have been removed and replaced with exotic species, removing the havens for wildlife that used to exist. Replies to my previous complaints re removal of native trees have stated that Usyd wishes to continue the 'heritage', but minimal, planting of rhododendrons begun by an idiosyncratic 20thc professor, and quite unsuitable as a plantings for a landmark Australian university site. These decisions showed little foresight, and no sensitivity to the site regarding its position and relationship to the local area. darlington has heritage street plantings of mature paperbarks. Usyd removed their paperbarks which visually integrated the communities, to replace them with conventional hard spaces and exotics.

While the university now has had a biodiversity report on flora and fauna, by Uni of tTechnology, they did not do this before. Even this new report seems to have missed the still resident possums, and occasional owls that visit however. The report does stress the value of the eucalyptus grove on Shepherd Street however, both aesthetically and environmentally. It is now the only stand of native trees on this campus, and of great value to the local residents, and to local wildlife. These trees have been there for roughly 20years. How can the university expect to receive permission to cut them down to replace them with high rise building adjacent to the public footpath! Surely the have the architectural expertise and ingenuity to design buildings which will complement not kill these trees, and prove an aesthetic amenity to the heritage Darlington suburb they have almost destroyed. They even plan to destroy the integrity of the last intact terraces owned by them in Darlington Rd.! This would not be approved for any other residential development in the area!

The original understanding between the university and the Darlington community was that the campus would be shared, so keeping green space available for passive recreation by local residents. This seems to have been forgotten over the last 10 years. Security guards warn dog owners and walkers off, and natural landscape is removed without consultation. Darlington should not be reduced to an overflow car park and pedestrian thoroughfare for University staff and students, nor stripped of habitat for local wildlife. Solar power is not being used to replace noisy air conditioners, nor green walls and roofs refreshing the atmosphere.

I also object to the huge increase in residential accommodation and in office floorspace planned for the site. That density of occupation would not be approved for any other developers in the Darlington area, where there is a height restriction equal to the existing 2 storey houses. Why is this not to be adhered to by the university, just because of artificial demarcation of ownership, and the fact that they are on the other side of a street ? The noise, traffic and pedestrian movement , and air pollution resulting from the massive increase in density would not be approved for any other developer; an un-debated exemption for the university is unwarranted.

Sydney university has other campuses throughout the Sydney region. These are much closer to the residential centre and nodes of Sydney, and should be redeveloped for the convenience of staff and students rather than overdeveloping this heritage city site, and requiring the hapless staff and students to travel long distances daily or crowd into very expensive accommodation. I suggest an urban planner look at the entirety of Sydney university land holdings, and develop a more strategic and environmentally sustainable plan for the future of the university has a whole, and stop considering this campus in isolation. Perhaps admin should be at Darlington, and all teacihng and research on outlying campuses!

Yours faithfully,


Alexandra Rivers

To: [email protected]

cc: [email protected]

cc: [email protected]

Dear Mr McManus,

University of Sydney's Campus Improvement Program 2014-2020 State Significant Development (SSD 6123)

I am a resident of Darlington and I have been granted an extension until 31 March 2014 to make a submission in regard to the above State Significant Development (SSD) application.

I object to the above development application for the following reasons -

1. No Community Consultation
I object to the University NOT consulting with the local community and failing to comply with the following Director General's requirement - "During the preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), consultation must be undertaken with community groups and affected landowners. In particular you must consult with: RAIDD - Residents Acting In Darlington's Defence."

2. Height, Scale and Location of Buildings
I object to this massive building program which would increase floor space by a massive 68% from 555,600m2 to 937,800m2 with building heights of up to 19 storeys.

The height and bulk of the proposed buildings are too great for the low rise heritage conservation residential precinct in which the University sits.

I object to the proposed 3 storey building in Shepherd Street and the "multidisciplinary building" opposite the Sports Centre both of which will overlook residents homes in Shepherd Street, Calder Road, Lander Street, Boundary Street and Abercrombie Street.

The University should be required to create green buffer zones between its buildings and residential buildings.

3. Separate Development Applications
I object to all new buildings and any refurbishments of existing buildings within the Campus Improvement Program (CIP) being approved under this one SSD.

Each new building or refurbishment of an existing building should be subject to individual development applications so that the dimensions, scale and use of each building is specified and conditions are imposed upon approval.

All new buildings should be set back from the street and located well within the University boundaries.

4. Heritage
I object to the University's proposal to completely infill the backyards of every heritage listed terrace house (bar 3) from 86 - 130 Darlington Road with 3 storey extensions.

The National Trust has given these terraces an "A" rating - "highly intact". The University should not be allowed to degrade the heritage value of these terraces which are very close to the Golden Grove Conservation Area.

5. Noise
I object to the potential increase in noise from plant equipment such as large 24/7 air conditioners and cooling towers on proposed University buildings close to residents' homes.

The University should establish the cumulative noise impact of ALL of its existing buildings before permission is given for further developments to proceed. The University should demonstrate that the cumulative noise impact of all of its buildings complies with environmental legislation before permission for further developments is given.

Substantial green buffer zones should be created between new university buildings and residents to help reduce the impact of noise.

6. Infrastructure
I object to increasing the student population from 49,500 to 60,000 by 2020 because the local infrastructure cannot even cope with the existing number of people coming into the area as it is. The plan should be withdrawn until local infrastructure, including footpaths and access to Redfern Station, are improved to cope with the increased population.

7. Vegetation
I object to the destruction of the Darlington Eucalypt Grove in Shepherd Street and replacing it with a 3 storey building overlooking residents' houses. This is one of the only remaining open spaces on the edge of the Darlington campus and should be retained to provide a green buffer zone between the University and the adjoining residential area.

The University's Ecological Assessment recommends: "Avoid removal of mature trees and protection of trees in proximity to building/refurbishment sites."

8. Traffic and Parking
I object to the introduction of large car parks on the Darlington campus. With the projected huge increase in the University population coming to the Darlington campus to use these car parks will come the associated problem of traffic congestion on residential streets. The University has not addressed this problem at all.

University staff and students unable or unwilling to use these car parks will end up competing for parking on residential streets in Darlington. It will mean that residents' parking is severely reduced and will also compound the traffic congestion in the area.

I object to the University removing the ability of students and staff to drive through the campus. University traffic should be arriving at and departing from the campus via the main arterial roads such as City Road and Parramatta Road not via the residential streets of Darlington.

The University should be required to encourage short term parking on the larger Camperdown campus not on the Darlington campus.

Currently, University staff and students are taking up much of the parking on residential streets. Residents, and especially elderly residents, should be able to park within reasonable walking distance from their homes.

I object to Butlin Avenue becoming a shared zone between traffic and pedestrians. It is one of the main roads in and out of Darlington for vehicles. As a shared zone it would create an unsafe environment for pedestrians and drivers alike.

9. Service Centres
I object to the proposed Service Centre on Shepherd Street as it will bring heavy, loud vehicles onto a residential street. As it will be positioned on the narrowest part of this street, it will also create a dangerous traffic hazard.

A more appropriate location for the Service Centre would be near the intersection of Shepherd and Cleveland Streets. This would mean the heavy service vehicles could enter and exit from the main arterial road of Cleveland Street and would therefore be kept off residential streets.

I object to many aspects of this SSD application.

As a resident of Darlington I have not been given nearly enough time to study and comprehend such a huge and complex document as the CIP.

The University should consult properly with the community specifically in regard to the CIP as they were required to do by the Director General. I look forward to proper consultation with the University prior to this application being approved. During this consultation process residents' views should be listened to and acted on appropriately by the University.

This huge and massive development program will have a major effect on myself, my family and the Darlington community. It is not something which I as a resident of Darlington take lightly.

Yours faithfully,

Bernice Johnston

Dear Mr McManus

Re: Objections to Application No. SSD6123

The University of Sydney Camperdown - Darlington Campus

Notice has been taken of the proposed construction by the University of a three storey building fronting Shepherd St Darlington, from opposite Calder Road to opposite Boundary Street.

As a resident of the above address for some years I have witnessed the razing of the suburb of Darlington by the University of Sydney from the Institute Building (now the Darlington Centre), to Shepherd Street. This has resulted in the loss of 650 19th Century terraces and cottages, not to mention the loss of the Gothic style Darlington Post Office, Town Hall and the partial destruction of the Gothic style Darlington Public School, the latter partially remains only because of resident action in the early 1970's which also quelled the University's plan to procure more resident's homes and expand on the eastern side of Shepherd Street after destroying more terrace houses.

The construction of a three storey building on Shepherd Street would result in the removal of the last vestige of greenery (the Eucalypt grove and hedge) left to residents living along Shepherd St, Calder Road and Boundary Street whose homes front the proposed construction site.

I request that the NSW Department of Planning take into consideration the already substantial University buildings along Shepherd St, namely: the monstrous 5 storey car park, Aeronautical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and Civil Engineering.

All unattractive brick and cement with no landscaping. Do we have to lose this only green area on the western side of Shepherd Street?

The construction of this building close to the road would also cause homes to be overlooked by windows day and night and create light and noise pollution with air-conditioning at night.

The unusual geographical lie of the land finds Calder Road terraces from no.'s 57-67 facing this site almost directly. The existing two to three storey Civil Engineering Building fronting Shepherd Street already shadows terraces from 67 Calder Road to 153 Shepherd St in winter.

I realise that this area is a prime building site for the University and appreciate the green spaces and environment the University has created in internal areas of the University for the benefit of students and staff but this is of no consequence to residents faced with the bleak outlook of more brick, glass and concrete replacing greenery in front of their homes.

With its history of a scarred legacy along Shepherd St, I can only hope that the University of Sydney can see its way to retaining this green space which contains a whole ecological system of wildlife unique to the city, with special reference to the 50 year old Eucalypt (Arbour Plan 0054).

Probably of little consequence to the University but hopefully to planning officers, Shepherd St was the site of Sydney's first nursery (Thomas Shepherd - Australia's first professional horticulturalist).

In conclusion I strongly object to the plan to destroy Darlington's Eucalypt Grove in Shepherd Street.

Yours sincerely

Mary-Theresa Hanson

I would like to formally object to several issues within the Sydney Universities Campus improvement program, listed below. I am appalled and saddened by the total disregard the University has shown to the local community, Australia's urban development and its own historical position as Australia's oldest University . It is this historical position that puts it into heart of low rise heritage conservation residential precinct that they are blatantly seeking to destroy.

Further the University continues to show a total disregard for its impact in the greater Sydney landscape with some aspects of this development in immediate contravention to rulings by the Australian National Trust and the Director General.

I ask that the proposed development be rejected.

I object to:

1. University NOT consulting with the local community and failing to comply with the following Director General's requirement - "During the preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), consultation must be undertaken with community groups and affected landowners.

2. The destruction of the Darlington Eucalypt Grove in Shepherd Street. The University's Ecological Assessment recommends: "Avoid removal of mature trees and protection of trees in proximity to building/refurbishment sites."

3. increases floor area from 555,600m2 to 937,800m2 with building heights of up to 19 storeys. The height and bulk of the proposed buildings are too great for the low rise heritage conservation residential precinct in which the University sits. I especially object to the proposed 3 storey building in Shepherd Street and the "multidisciplinary building" opposite the sports centre both of which will overlook residents homes in Shepherd Street, Calder Road, Lander Street, Boundary street and Abercrombie Street. The University should create green buffer zones between its buildings and residential buildings.

4. increase in noise from
a. plant equipment such as large 24/7 air conditioners and cooling towers
b. an increase in University car traffic.
c. The University must measure the cumulative impact of all the noise it generates to ensure that it always complies with environmental legislation.

5. proposal to completely infill the backyards of every heritage listed terrace house from 86 - 130 Darlington Road with 3 storey extensions. The National trust has given these terraces an "A" rating - "highly intact". The University should not be allowed to degrade the heritage value of these terraces which are very close to the Golden Grove Conservation Area.

6. 68% increases in floor space and increasing the student population from 49,500 to 60,000 by 2020 because the local infrastructure cannot cope with the existing number of people. The plan should be withdrawn until local infrastructure, including footpaths and access to Redfern Station, are improved to cope with the increased population. The University's plan would put further stress on off street parking in residential streets as there would be an increase in the number of students and University staff parking their cars in local streets.

Yours sincerely

Heidi Jackson

Dear Sir/Madam,

I would like to formally object to several issues within the Sydney Universities Campus improvement program, listed below. I am appalled and saddened by the total disregard the University has shown to the local community, Australia's urban development and its own historical position as Australia's oldest University . It is this historical position that puts it into heart of low rise heritage conservation residential precinct that they are blatantly seeking to destroy.

Further the University continues to show a total disregard for its impact in the greater Sydney landscape with some aspects of this development in immediate contravention to rulings by the Australian National Trust and the Director General.

I ask that the proposed development be rejected.

I object to:

1. University NOT consulting with the local community and failing to comply with the following Director General's requirement - "During the preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), consultation must be undertaken with community groups and affected landowners.

2. The destruction of the Darlington Eucalypt Grove in Shepherd Street. The University's Ecological Assessment recommends: "Avoid removal of mature trees and protection of trees in proximity to building/refurbishment sites."

3. increases floor area from 555,600m2 to 937,800m2 with building heights of up to 19 storeys. The height and bulk of the proposed buildings are too great for the low rise heritage conservation residential precinct in which the University sits. I especially object to the proposed 3 storey building in Shepherd Street and the "multidisciplinary building" opposite the sports centre both of which will overlook residents homes in Shepherd Street, Calder Road, Lander Street, Boundary street and Abercrombie Street. The University should create green buffer zones between its buildings and residential buildings.

4. increase in noise from
a. plant equipment such as large 24/7 air conditioners and cooling towers
b. an increase in University car traffic.
c. The University must measure the cumulative impact of all the noise it generates to ensure that it always complies with environmental legislation.

5. proposal to completely infill the backyards of every heritage listed terrace house from 86 - 130 Darlington Road with 3 storey extensions. The National trust has given these terraces an "A" rating - "highly intact". The University should not be allowed to degrade the heritage value of these terraces which are very close to the Golden Grove Conservation Area.

6. 68% increases in floor space and increasing the student population from 49,500 to 60,000 by 2020 because the local infrastructure cannot cope with the existing number of people. The plan should be withdrawn until local infrastructure, including footpaths and access to Redfern Station, are improved to cope with the increased population. The University's plan would put further stress on off street parking in residential streets as there would be an increase in the number of students and University staff parking their cars in local streets.

Yours sincerely,

Ian Medina

28 March 2014

Development Assessment Systems and Approvals
NSW Department of Planning & Infrastructure
GPO Box 39 Sydney, NSW, 2001.

Dear Mr McManus,

University of Sydney's Campus Improvement Program 2014-2020 State Significant Development (SSD 6123)

I am a resident of Darlington and I have been granted an extension until 31 March 2014 to make a submission in regard to the above State Significant Development (SSD) application.

I object to the above development application for the following reasons -

1. No Community Consultation
I object to the University NOT consulting with the local community and failing to comply with the following Director General's requirement - "During the preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), consultation must be undertaken with community groups and affected landowners. In particular you must consult with: RAIDD - Residents Acting In Darlington's Defence."

2. Height, Scale and Location of Buildings
I object to this massive building program which would increase floor space by a massive 68% from 555,600m2 to 937,800m2 with building heights of up to 19 storeys.

The height and bulk of the proposed buildings are too great for the low rise heritage conservation residential precinct in which the University sits. All of these proposed buildings need to be significantly reduced in height and set back from building site perimeters.

I object to the proposed 3 storey building in Shepherd Street and the "multidisciplinary building" opposite the Sports Centre both of which will overlook residents homes in Shepherd Street, Calder Road, Lander Street, Boundary Street and Abercrombie Street.

The University should be required to create green buffer zones between its buildings and residential buildings.

3. Separate Development Applications
I object to all new buildings and any refurbishments of existing buildings within the Campus Improvement Program (CIP) being approved under this one SSD.

Each new building or refurbishment of an existing building should be subject to individual development applications so that the dimensions, scale and use of each building is specified and conditions are imposed upon approval.

All new buildings should be set back from the street and located well within the University boundaries.

4. Heritage
I object to the University's proposal to completely infill the backyards of every heritage listed terrace house (bar 3) from 86 - 130 Darlington Road with 3 storey extensions.

The National Trust has given these terraces an "A" rating - "highly intact". The University should not be allowed to degrade the heritage value of these terraces which are very close to the Golden Grove Conservation Area.

5. Noise
I object to the potential increase in noise from plant equipment such as large 24/7 air conditioners and cooling towers on proposed University buildings close to residents' homes.

The University should establish the cumulative noise impact of ALL of its existing buildings before permission is given for further developments to proceed. The University should demonstrate that the cumulative noise impact of all of its buildings complies with environmental legislation before permission for further developments is given.

Substantial green buffer zones should be created between new university buildings and residents to help reduce the impact of noise.

6. Infrastructure
I object to increasing the student population from 49,500 to 60,000 by 2020 because the local infrastructure cannot even cope with the existing number of people coming into the area as it is. The plan should be withdrawn until local infrastructure, including footpaths and access to Redfern Station, are improved to cope with the increased population.

7. Vegetation

I object to the destruction of the Darlington Eucalypt Grove in Shepherd Street and replacing it with a 3 storey building overlooking residents' houses. This is one of the only remaining open spaces on the edge of the Darlington campus and should be retained to provide a green buffer zone between the University and the adjoining residential area.

The University's Ecological Assessment recommends: "Avoid removal of mature trees and protection of trees in proximity to building/refurbishment sites."

8. Traffic and Parking
I object to the introduction of large car parks on the Darlington campus. With the projected huge increase in the University population coming to the Darlington campus to use these car parks will come the associated problem of traffic congestion on residential streets. The University has not addressed this problem at all.

University staff and students unable or unwilling to use these car parks will end up competing for parking on residential streets in Darlington. It will mean that residents' parking is severely reduced and will also compound the traffic congestion in the area.

I object to the University removing the ability of students and staff to drive through the campus. University traffic should be arriving at and departing from the campus via the main arterial roads such as City Road and Parramatta Road not via the residential streets of Darlington.

The University should be required to encourage short term parking on the larger Camperdown campus not on the Darlington campus.

Currently, University staff and students are taking up much of the parking on residential streets. Residents, and especially elderly residents, should be able to park within reasonable walking distance from their homes.

I object to Butlin Avenue becoming a shared zone between traffic and pedestrians. It is one of the main roads in and out of Darlington for vehicles. As a shared zone it would create an unsafe environment for pedestrians and drivers alike.

9. Service Centres
I object to the proposed Service Centre on Shepherd Street as it will bring heavy, loud vehicles onto a residential street. As it will be positioned on the narrowest part of this street, it will also create a dangerous traffic hazard.

A more appropriate location for the Service Centre would be near the intersection of Shepherd and Cleveland Streets. This would mean the heavy service vehicles could enter and exit from the main arterial road of Cleveland Street and would therefore be kept off residential streets.

I object to so many aspects of this SSD application.

As a resident of Darlington I have not been given nearly enough time to study and comprehend such a huge and complex document as the CIP.

The University should consult properly with the community specifically in regard to the CIP as they were required to do by the Director General. I look forward to proper consultation with the University prior to this application being approved. During this consultation process residents' views should be listened to and acted on appropriately by the University.

This huge and massive development program will have a major effect on myself, my family and the Darlington community. It is not something which I as a resident of Darlington take lightly.

Yours faithfully,

Jennifer Sams

I am writing to object to some pf the proposals for the expansion of building works at Sydney University.
SSD13_6123 USYD Campus Improvement Program 2014-2020

I live in Abercrombie St Darlington and am feeling the proposed expansion that is happening is a threat to how this small suburb was when I moved here only 4 years ago. This is a heritage area and with the expansion of large buildings being built now and these proposals this suburb is being "stood over".

My neighbour was here in the 70's when the terraces on the north of Abercrombie were lost. I have cousins who attended the University when the terraces were still there. I have seen overhead photos of Darlington from 1947 which show terraces from Wilson St to City road.

I understand that the Uni might need to expand, however the loss of areas like Darlington leave Sydney without a record to its past. And would detract from the University's connection to its surroundings.

The terraces along Darlington St still keep this record partially intact, and filling their backyards with more building seems a little desperate.

To give you a feel for what I mean: consider putting up a 6 to 19 story building where the tennis and croquet courts stand, in the center of the University grounds, I for one would find that disappointing as I enjoy to walk through the Uni grounds. I find the line of high rise looking over Darlington also disappointing.

The Student accommodation proposals to Abercrombie St seem a fait accomplit although I still hope for the student accommodation will be set back from the road to save the trees that are on the Uni grounds.

It is also hoped that the plans to cut down the trees on Shepherd St and replace them with 3 stories is rethought. Spend five minutes and look at the huge flooded gum opposite this grove and see what a tree can contribute to our suburb. I believe these trees were planted from local seed and they promise a haven for birds etc. and a softening to the environment.

Finding parking here is getting more difficult and therefore more students mean more cars. Maybe these cars should pay attention to the parking rules but that is not what always happens. Maybe they should catch public transport but....that's not what always happens.

I enjoy living in this area and the life the University brings adds to that enjoyment. I can understand that the Uni wants to expand. I submit though that the overpowering of the adjoining suburb of Darlington not only would lessen the residents lifestyle but would lessen the attraction of the surrounding environment for the University as well.


Your faithfully
John Gain

Dear Mr McManus,

I am extremely concerned about some of the development plans for the Darlington suburb by the University of Sydney. I am not against progress but I think in this instance it's a step too far.

In this case, it's the proposal to build multiple storey accommodation in the backyards of the properties along Darlington road. I am a resident of Darlington road, number 88, one of seven

private owners spread all along Darlington road. Does that mean if this is allowed the university will build around the backyards of the private residents? A number of years ago the university

wanted to cut their backyards along Darlington road in half for some sort of beautification process. It wasn't feasible then and surely it's not feasible now. Back then I felt it was some sort of

subtle intimidation as there were many elderly residents occupying the Universities properties. None now!

I am opposed to this purely based on the stupidity of the proposal. We are not being kept informed by the University. Information is important and its best if it comes straight from the horse's mouth.

Kind regards

John Kelly

To whom it may concern,

As a 20 year resident of Abercrombie St [opposite the sports centre car park] I find the universities' continued encroachment on my residential suburb becoming more and more problematic. Apart from the constant dust [my daughter's asthma continues to get worse], building noise, late night crane delivery, alarms, several close calls from contractors vehicles on pedestrian crossings with my children, the noise from the air conditioning plants, the looming presence of the sports centre blocking light, the weekend noise from the sports centre [yes I can hear very loud music and commentators at high volume], the impossibility of getting a car park outside my house during the week, the complete lack of interest when I ask they fix a hydraulic gate whining every time it opens, the high pitched squeal from plants behind the childcare centre every night. The fact that I have to walk in the gutter to get to the train station every morning. The list goes on...

I would like to formally object to several issues within the Sydney Universities Campus improvement program, listed below.

Further the University continues to show a total disregard for its impact in the greater Sydney landscape with some aspects of this development in immediate contravention to rulings by the Australian National Trust and the Director General.

I ask that the proposed development be rejected.

I object to:

1. University NOT consulting with the local community and failing to comply with the following Director General's requirement - "During the preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), consultation must be undertaken with community groups and affected landowners.

2. The destruction of the Darlington Eucalypt Grove in Shepherd Street. The University's Ecological Assessment recommends: "Avoid removal of mature trees and protection of trees in proximity to building/refurbishment sites."

3. increases floor area from 555,600m2 to 937,800m2 with building heights of up to 19 storeys. The height and bulk of the proposed buildings are too great for the low rise heritage conservation residential precinct in which the University sits. I especially object to the proposed 3 storey building in Shepherd Street and the "multidisciplinary building" opposite the sports centre both of which will overlook residents homes in Shepherd Street, Calder Road, Lander Street, Boundary street and Abercrombie Street. The University should create green buffer zones between its buildings and residential buildings.

4. increase in noise from
a. plant equipment such as large 24/7 air conditioners and cooling towers
b. an increase in University car traffic.
c. The University must measure the cumulative impact of all the noise it generates to ensure that it always complies with environmental legislation.

5. proposal to completely infill the backyards of every heritage listed terrace house from 86 - 130 Darlington Road with 3 storey extensions. The National trust has given these terraces an "A" rating - "highly intact". The University should not be allowed to degrade the heritage value of these terraces which are very close to the Golden Grove Conservation Area.

6. 68% increases in floor space and increasing the student population from 49,500 to 60,000 by 2020 because the local infrastructure cannot cope with the existing number of people. The plan should be withdrawn until local infrastructure, including footpaths and access to Redfern Station, are improved to cope with the increased population. The University's plan would put further stress on off street parking in residential streets as there would be an increase in the number of students and University staff parking their cars in local streets.

Katharine Vanderwal

As a concerned local resident and the parent of a child attending Darlington Public School, I would like to formally object to several issues within the Sydney Universities Campus improvement program, listed below.
I am appalled and saddened by the total disregard the University has shown to the local community, Australia's urban development and its own historical position as Australia's oldest University . It is this historical position that puts it into heart of low rise heritage conservation residential precinct that they are blatantly seeking to destroy.

Further the University continues to show a total disregard for its impact in the greater Sydney landscape with some aspects of this development in immediate contravention to rulings by the Australian National Trust and the Director General.

I ask that the proposed development be rejected.

I object to:

1. University NOT consulting with the local community and failing to comply with the following Director General's requirement - "During the preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), consultation must be undertaken with community groups and affected landowners.

2. The destruction of the Darlington Eucalypt Grove in Shepherd Street. The University's Ecological Assessment recommends: "Avoid removal of mature trees and protection of trees in proximity to building/refurbishment sites."

3. increases floor area from 555,600m2 to 937,800m2 with building heights of up to 19 storeys. The height and bulk of the proposed buildings are too great for the low rise heritage conservation residential precinct in which the University sits. I especially object to the proposed 3 storey building in Shepherd Street and the "multidisciplinary building" opposite the sports centre both of which will overlook residents homes in Shepherd Street, Calder Road, Lander Street, Boundary street and Abercrombie Street. The University should create green buffer zones between its buildings and residential buildings.

4. increase in noise from
a. plant equipment such as large 24/7 air conditioners and cooling towers
b. an increase in University car traffic.
c. The University must measure the cumulative impact of all the noise it generates to ensure that it always complies with environmental legislation.

5. proposal to completely infill the backyards of every heritage listed terrace house from 86 - 130 Darlington Road with 3 storey extensions. The National trust has given these terraces an "A" rating - "highly intact". The University should not be allowed to degrade the heritage value of these terraces which are very close to the Golden Grove Conservation Area.

6. 68% increases in floor space and increasing the student population from 49,500 to 60,000 by 2020 because the local infrastructure cannot cope with the existing number of people. The plan should be withdrawn until local infrastructure, including footpaths and access to Redfern Station, are improved to cope with the increased population. The University's plan would put further stress on off street parking in residential streets as there would be an increase in the number of students and University staff parking their cars in local streets. We are already seeing a marked increase in street traffic through narrow residential streets and serious issues with parking. A large increase in student numbers would make those problems much worse. No further development should be considered unless it is accompanied by the appropriate infrastructure development to manage the flow of people in and out of the area.

Yours sincerely

Mardi McConnochie

Dear Mr McManus,

I am a resident of Darlington and I have been granted an extension until 31 March 2014 to make a submission in regard to the above State Significant Development (SSD) application.

I object to the above development application for the following reasons -

1. No Community Consultation
I object to the University NOT consulting with the local community and failing to comply with the following Director General's requirements (SSD 13_6123 DGRs.pdf and Modified SSD 13_6123 DGRs Reissued 23.10.2013.pdf) which says "During the preparation of the EIS, consultation must be undertaken with the relevant Commonwealth Government, State or local authorities, service providers, community groups and affected landowners. In particular you must consult with:..RAIDD - Residents Acting In Darlington's Defence."

Furthermore, in Appendix N - Consultation Outcomes, in the document Appendix N_Consultation.pdf, I am listed as a Member of RAIDD, a Community Stakeholder, even though I have never been consulted by the University of Sydney in regard to the Environmental Impact Statement of the Campus Improvement Program as directed by the Director-General. In fact, I have not been consulted by the University of Sydney about anything to do with this Program.

This seems to be a deliberate attempt by the University to mislead the Department of Planning.

As the main RAIDD contact, I have never received a request by the University to organise RAIDD representatives to meet with them in regard to the SSD application for its Campus Improvement Program 2014-2020.

I am outraged to see my name and others from the community listed in Appendix N Consultation Outcomes.

During meetings in regard to the Abercrombie Precinct Development and the Pedestrian and Bicycle Strategy I was not informed by any of the University representatives that any comments I made were to be used in regard to the CIP. I was completely unaware of the CIP at the time.

I therefore demand that this document, as it is not true, is recalled as I have not been consulted in any way about the CIP.

2. Insufficient Response Time
I note that the University lodged 146 documents in support of its State Significant Development (SSD) application for its Campus Improvement Program 2014-2020 and that I initially had until 28 February 2014 to submit a response to the Department of Planning.

I object to the lack of time which residents have been given to respond to the CIP after having had no consultation during its development. I and many of the residents have full-time jobs, have families and therefore have very little time left in our busy schedules in which to understand something of this magnitude.

Giving residents less than 4 weeks to absorb a wealth of information, understand the implications it may have on the surrounding community, and formulate a meaningful response is simply not manageable. We do not feel that we were given nearly enough time in which to do this. This is unfair and unacceptable.

Clearly, the University has been preparing all these documents over many months and even years. In all that time the University has not consulted with local residents, the people who will be directly affected by what they are proposing in this SSD application, in any way whatsoever.

3. Height, Scale and Location of Buildings
I object to this massive building program which would increase floor space by a massive 68% from 555,600m2 to 937,800m2 with building heights of up to 19 storeys.

Overall, the height and bulk of the proposed buildings are too great for the low rise heritage conservation residential precinct in which the University sits.

I object to the proposed 3 storey building in Shepherd Street and the "multidisciplinary building" opposite the Sports Centre both of which will overlook residents homes in Shepherd Street, Calder Road, Lander Street, Boundary Street and Abercrombie Street.

I object to the proposed development of the Regiment Building which will be up to 9 storeys in height. It will result in significant overshadowing of the public housing in Golden Grove Street and also of the Darlington Public School playground.

The University should be required to create green buffer zones between its buildings and residential buildings. All new buildings should be set back from the street and located well within the University boundaries.

4. Separate Development Applications
I object to all new buildings and any refurbishments of existing buildings within the Campus Improvement Program (CIP) being approved under this one SSD.

Each new building or refurbishment of an existing building should be subject to individual development applications so that the dimensions, scale and use of each building is specified and conditions are imposed upon approval.

5. Heritage
I object to the University's proposal to completely infill the backyards of every heritage listed terrace house (bar 3) from 86 - 130 Darlington Road with 3 storey extensions.

The National Trust has given these terraces an "A" rating - "highly intact". The University should not be allowed to degrade the heritage value of these terraces which are very close to the Golden Grove Conservation Area.

If the University is allowed to build 3 storey extensions in the rear of heritage listed terraces then the precedent is set for residents throughout Sydney to do the same. This should not be allowed to happen.

6. Noise
I object to the potential increase in noise from plant equipment such as large 24/7 air conditioners and cooling towers on proposed University buildings close to residents' homes.

The University should establish the cumulative noise impact of ALL of its existing buildings before permission is given for further developments to proceed. The University should demonstrate that the cumulative noise impact of all of its buildings complies with environmental legislation before permission for further developments is given.

Substantial green buffer zones should be created between new university buildings and residents to help reduce the impact of noise.

7. Population Increase and Infrastructure
I object to increasing the student population from 49,500 to 60,000 by 2020 because the local infrastructure cannot even cope with the existing number of people coming into the area as it is.

The plan should be withdrawn until local infrastructure, including footpaths and access to Redfern Station, are improved to cope with the increased population.

8. Vegetation
I object to the destruction of the Darlington Eucalypt Grove in Shepherd Street and replacing it with a 3 storey building overlooking residents' houses. This is one of the only remaining open spaces on the edge of the Darlington campus and should be retained to provide a green buffer zone between the University and the adjoining residential area.

The University's Ecological Assessment recommends: "Avoid removal of mature trees and protection of trees in proximity to building/refurbishment sites."

9. Traffic and Parking
I object to the introduction of large car parks on the Darlington campus. With the projected huge increase in the University population coming to the Darlington campus to use these car parks will come the associated problem of traffic congestion on residential streets. The University has not addressed this problem at all.

University staff and students unable or unwilling to use these car parks will end up competing for parking on residential streets in Darlington. It will mean that residents' parking is severely reduced and will also compound the traffic congestion in the area.

I object to the University removing the ability of students and staff to drive through the campus. University traffic should be arriving at and departing from the campus via the main arterial roads such as City Road and Parramatta Road not via the residential streets of Darlington.

The University should be required to encourage short term parking on the larger Camperdown campus not on the Darlington campus.

Currently, University staff and students are taking up much of the parking on residential streets throughout Darlington. Residents, and especially elderly residents, should be able to park within reasonable walking distance from their homes.

I object to Butlin Avenue becoming a shared zone between traffic and pedestrians. It is one of the main roads in and out of Darlington for vehicles. As a shared zone it would create an unsafe environment for pedestrians and drivers alike.

10. Service Centres
I object to the proposed Service Centre on Shepherd Street as it will bring heavy, loud vehicles onto a residential street. As it will be positioned on the narrowest part of this street, it will also create a dangerous traffic hazard.

A more appropriate location for the Service Centre would be near the intersection of Shepherd and Cleveland Streets. This would mean the heavy service vehicles could enter and exit from the main arterial road of Cleveland Street and would therefore be kept off residential streets.

I object to many aspects of this SSD application and believe that it should be withdrawn.

As a resident of Darlington I have not been given nearly enough time to study and comprehend such a huge and complex document as the CIP.

The University should consult properly with the community specifically in regard to the CIP as they were required to do by the Director General. I look forward to proper consultation with the University prior to this application being approved. During this consultation process residents' views should be listened to and acted on appropriately by the University.

This huge and massive development program will have a major effect on myself, my family and the Darlington community. It is not something which I as a resident of Darlington take lightly.

Yours faithfully,

Mary Ellen McCue

I would like to formally object to several issues within the Sydney Universities Campus improvement program, listed below. I am appalled and saddened by the total disregard the University has shown to the local community, Australia's urban development including and its own historical position as Australia's oldest University . It is this historical position that puts it into heart of low rise heritage conservation residential precinct that they are blatantly seeking to destroy.

Further the University continues to show a total disregard for its impact in the greater Sydney landscape with some aspects of this development in immediate contravention to rulings by the Australian National Trust and the Director General.

I ask that the proposed development be rejected.

I object to:

1. University NOT consulting with the local community and failing to comply with the following Director General's requirement - "During the preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), consultation must be undertaken with community groups and affected landowners.

2. The destruction of the Darlington Eucalypt Grove in Shepherd Street. The University's Ecological Assessment recommends: "Avoid removal of mature trees and protection of trees in proximity to building/refurbishment sites."

3. increases floor area from 555,600m2 to 937,800m2 with building heights of up to 19 storeys. The height and bulk of the proposed buildings are too great for the low rise heritage conservation residential precinct in which the University sits. I especially object to the proposed 3 storey building in Shepherd Street and the "multidisciplinary building" opposite the sports centre both of which will overlook residents homes in Shepherd Street, Calder Road, Lander Street, Boundary street and Abercrombie Street. The University should create green buffer zones between its buildings and residential buildings.

4. increase in noise from
a. plant equipment such as large 24/7 air conditioners and cooling towers
b. an increase in University car traffic.
c. The University must measure the cumulative impact of all the noise it generates to ensure that it always complies with environmental legislation.

5. proposal to completely infill the backyards of every heritage listed terrace house from 86 - 130 Darlington Road with 3 storey extensions. The National trust has given these terraces an "A" rating - "highly intact". The University should not be allowed to degrade the heritage value of these terraces which are very close to the Golden Grove Conservation Area.

6. 68% increases in floor space and increasing the student population from 49,500 to 60,000 by 2020 because the local infrastructure cannot cope with the existing number of people. The plan should be withdrawn until local infrastructure, including footpaths and access to Redfern Station, are improved to cope with the increased population. The University's plan would put further stress on off street parking in residential streets as there would be an increase in the number of students and University staff parking their cars in local streets.

Yours sincerely

Maya Saric

Dear Mr McManus,

Re: University of Sydney's Campus Improvement Program (SSD 6123)

Submission by way of objection to the above project:

I am a resident of Darlington affected by the above expansion project of Sydney University. I am concerned that this massive overdevelopment, euphemistically referred to as a "Campus Improvement Project", will all but destroy our community already suffering from the enormous 8 story Business School development right in front of our 19 century terraces.

I am against the removal of more trees, loss of vegetation and reduction in open space in our suburb to cram 10 to 15 story building side by side, right on the border with residential street, in front of 2 story terraces. This will deface our suburb and ruin the streetscape for residents.

The other major concern I have is that no infrastructure is planned to divert traffic away from the residents, keeping in mind that we are squeezed between this unexpected additional development and the Eveleigh Development that has no direct access to main roads. Abercrombie St and Wilson St are now already congested by through traffic and patrons looking for (non existent) parking and this makes life impossible in our streets. This development cannot take place until the State puts in a traffic control plan for the area.

On this subject, please note for reference that I am also against the closure of Butlin St/Codrington St, which has traffic lights and right hand turn at City Rd and is a vital link to Eveleigh Development and Carriageworks, which generate a lot of traffic already. Traffic to these new developments should not have skirt around the massive campus to travel the whole length of Darlington, past the primary school and annoying residents. In fact, given that Darlington St is only used for University parking, it should be reopened from Newtown end to prevent this traffic circling around past the school, which is absurd. This access also helps reduce the number of cars turning right into Butlin Ave from Newtown. It is a win-win solution.

Apart from these concerns, this project is too immense to be able to analyse every single problem that may be raised and each building proposal should be made one at a time. I agree that there is scope for replacing some old structures and that regrouping some departments would make better use of the space, but not to increase capacity by over 50% to 60,000 students. We have already lost 300 homes, a park and over 100 trees on the Business School Project. If buildings of the size and height proposed are to be built there must be a proportional amount of space around them and a green buffer zones with residential streets.

These are but some of the problems I foresee but I also subscribe to the objections discussed with the Darlington Residents Group RAIDD below, therefore:

I object to the proposed development for the following reasons :

1. No Community Consultation
I object to the University NOT consulting with the local community and failing to comply with the following Director General's requirement - "During the preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), consultation must be undertaken with community groups and affected landowners. In particular you must consult with: RAIDD - Residents Acting In Darlington's Defence."

2. Height, Scale and Location of Buildings
I object to this massive building program which would increase floor space by a massive 68% from 555,600m2 to 937,800m2 with building heights of up to 19 storeys.

The height and bulk of the proposed buildings are too great for the low rise heritage conservation residential precinct in which the University sits.

I object to the proposed 3 storey building in Shepherd Street and the "multidisciplinary building" opposite the Sports Centre both of which will overlook residents homes in Shepherd Street, Calder Road, Lander Street, Boundary Street and Abercrombie Street.

The University should be required to create green buffer zones between its buildings and residential buildings.

3. Separate Development Applications
I object to all new buildings and any refurbishments of existing buildings within the Campus Improvement Program (CIP) being approved under this one SSD.

Each new building or refurbishment of an existing building should be subject to individual development applications so that the dimensions, scale and use of each building is specified and conditions are imposed upon approval.

All new buildings should be set back from the street and located well within the University boundaries.

4. Heritage
I object to the University's proposal to completely infill the backyards of every heritage listed terrace house (bar 3) from 86 - 130 Darlington Road with 3 storey extensions.

The National Trust has given these terraces an "A" rating - "highly intact". The University should not be allowed to degrade the heritage value of these terraces which are very close to the Golden Grove Conservation Area.

5. Noise
I object to the potential increase in noise from plant equipment such as large 24/7 air conditioners and cooling towers on proposed University buildings close to residents' homes.

The University should establish the cumulative noise impact of ALL of its existing buildings before permission is given for further developments to proceed. The University should demonstrate that the cumulative noise impact of all of its buildings complies with environmental legislation before permission for further developments is given.

Substantial green buffer zones should be created between new university buildings and residents to help reduce the impact of noise.

6. Infrastructure
I object to increasing the student population from 49,500 to 60,000 by 2020 because the local infrastructure cannot even cope with the existing number of people coming into the area as it is. The plan should be withdrawn until local infrastructure, including footpaths and access to Redfern Station, are improved to cope with the increased population.

7. Vegetation
I object to the destruction of the Darlington Eucalypt Grove in Shepherd Street and replacing it with a 3 storey building overlooking residents' houses. This is one of the only remaining open spaces on the edge of the Darlington campus and should be retained to provide a green buffer zone between the University and the adjoining residential area.

The University's Ecological Assessment recommends: "Avoid removal of mature trees and protection of trees in proximity to building/refurbishment sites."

8. Traffic and Parking
I object to the introduction of large car parks on the Darlington campus. With the projected huge increase in the University population coming to the Darlington campus to use these car parks will come the associated problem of traffic congestion on residential streets. The University has not addressed this problem at all.

University staff and students unable or unwilling to use these car parks will end up competing for parking on residential streets in Darlington. It will mean that residents' parking is severely reduced and will also compound the traffic congestion in the area.

I object to the University removing the ability of students and staff to drive through the campus. University traffic should be arriving at and departing from the campus via the main arterial roads such as City Road and Parramatta Road not via the residential streets of Darlington.

The University should be required to encourage short term parking on the larger Camperdown campus not on the Darlington campus.

Currently, University staff and students are taking up much of the parking on residential streets. Residents, and especially elderly residents, should be able to park within reasonable walking distance from their homes.

I object to Butlin Avenue becoming a shared zone between traffic and pedestrians. It is one of the main roads in and out of Darlington for vehicles. As a shared zone it would create an unsafe environment for pedestrians and drivers alike.

9. Service Centres
I object to the proposed Service Centre on Shepherd Street as it will bring heavy, loud vehicles onto a residential street. As it will be positioned on the narrowest part of this street, it will also create a dangerous traffic hazard.

A more appropriate location for the Service Centre would be near the intersection of Shepherd and Cleveland Streets. This would mean the heavy service vehicles could enter and exit from the main arterial road of Cleveland Street and would therefore be kept off residential streets.

I object to many aspects of this SSD application.

As a resident of Darlington I have not been given nearly enough time to study and comprehend such a huge and complex document as the CIP.

The University should consult properly with the community specifically in regard to the CIP as they were required to do by the Director General. I look forward to proper consultation with the University prior to this application being approved. During this consultation process residents' views should be listened to and acted on appropriately by the University.

This huge and massive development program will have a major effect on myself, my family and the Darlington community. It is not something which I as a resident of Darlington take lightly.

Yours faithfully,

Maurice Thibaux

Dear Mr. McManus,

Happy Friday. I hope that this finds you well. I
just wanted to write in concern to the SSD 13_6123 USYD Campus Improvement Program 2014-2020 for the Cameperdown-Darlington area. Please see my concerns
below and thank you for your time.

University of Sydney's Campus Improvement Program 2014-2020 State Significant Development (SSD 6123)

I am a resident of Darlington and I have been granted an extension until 31 March 2014 to make a submission in regard to the above State Significant Development (SSD) application.

I object to the above development application for
the following reasons -

1. No Community Consultation
I object to the University NOT consulting with the local community and failing to comply with the following Director General's requirement - "During the preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), consultation must be
undertaken with community groups and affected landowners. In particular you must consult with: RAIDD - Residents Acting In Darlington's Defence."

2. Height, Scale and Location of Buildings
I object to the program increase in floor space by a massive 68% from 555,600m2 to 937,800m2 with building heights of up to 19 storeys.

The height and bulk of the proposed buildings are too great for the low-rise heritage conservation residential precinct in
which the University sits.

I object to the proposed 3-storey building in Shepherd Street and the "multidisciplinary building" opposite the Sports Centre, both of which will overlook residents homes in Shepherd Street, Calder Road, Lander Street, Boundary Street and Abercrombie Street.

The University should be required to create green buffer zones between its buildings and residential buildings.

3. Separate Development Applications
I object to all new buildings and any refurbishments of existing buildings within the Campus Improvement Program
(CIP) being approved under this one SSD.

Each new building or refurbishment of an existing building should be subject to individual development applications so
that the dimensions, scale and use of each building is specified and conditions are imposed upon approval.

All new buildings should be set back from the street and located well within the University boundaries.

4. Heritage
I object to the University's proposal to completely infill the backyards of every heritage listed terrace house (bar 3) from 86 - 130 Darlington Road with 3 storey extensions.

The National Trust has given these terraces an "A" rating - "highly intact". The University should not be allowed to degrade the heritage value of these terraces, which are very close to the Golden Grove Conservation Area.

5. Noise
I object to the potential increase in noise from plant equipment such as large 24/7 air conditioners and cooling towers on proposed University buildings close to residents' homes. The current construction is already very noisy for the residential apartment units being built near Codrington and Abercrombie street. Every morning from 6:30am and until late at night, we can hear the construction from over two streets away.

There is also a lot of construction on Abercrombie street already from the City of Sydney's development to enlarge footpaths and promote proposed greener areas.

The University should establish the cumulative noise impact of ALL of its existing buildings before permission is given for further developments to proceed. The University should demonstrate that the cumulative noise impact of all of its
buildings complies with environmental legislation before permission for further developments is given.

Substantial green buffer zones should be created between new university buildings and residents to help reduce the impact of noise. We need more trees in general and planning for additional vegetation and new tree growth should be allotted.

6. Infrastructure
I object to increasing the student population from 49,500 to 60,000 by 2020 because the local infrastructure cannot even cope with the existing number of people coming into the area as it is.

I struggle to walk safely to work every morning because the sidewalks on Abercrombie street are completely flooded by
university students making their way to campus.

My partner queues in massive lines that come up the stairs to the ticket area for trains at Redfern station.

The plan should be withdrawn until local infrastructure, including footpaths and access to Redfern Station, are improved to cope with the increased population. At present, it is already beyond crowded and overrun. There is not enough transportation and footpaths to deal with current student traffic. It is unpleasant for residents and unsafe for
commuters including automobile drivers when pedestrian traffic flows onto the streets.

7. Vegetation
I object to the destruction of the Darlington Eucalypt Grove in
Shepherd Street and replacing it with a 3-storey building overlooking residents' houses. We need to plant more
trees instead of cutting them down. Our environment is already at max capacity with human population and impact.

This is one of the only remaining open spaces on the edge of the Darlington campus and should be retained to provide a green buffer zone between the University and the adjoining residential area. In general, the destruction of trees has a negative impact on neighbourhoods both aesthetically and
environmentally.

The University's Ecological Assessment recommends: "Avoid removal of mature trees and protection of trees in proximity to building/refurbishment sites."

8. Traffic and Parking
I object to the introduction of large car parks on the Darlington campus. With the projected huge increase in
the University population coming to the Darlington campus to use these car parks will come the associated problem of traffic congestion on residential streets. The University has not addressed this problem at all. The university needs better public transportation access for students.

University staff and students unable or unwilling to use these car parks will end up competing for parking on residential streets in Darlington. It will mean that residents' parking is severely reduced and will also compound the
traffic congestion in the area. Residential parking is already scarce in the small area.

I object to the University removing the ability of students and staff to drive through the campus. University traffic should be arriving at and departing from the campus via the main arterial roads such as City Road and Parramatta Road not via the residential streets of Darlington.

The University should be required to encourage short term parking on the larger Camperdown campus not on the Darlington campus. On the Camperdown campus, there is much more space for growth and development.

Currently, University staff and students are taking up much of the parking on residential streets. Residents, and especially elderly residents, should be able to park within reasonable walking distance from their homes.

I object to Butlin Avenue becoming a shared zone between traffic and pedestrians. It is one of the main roads in and out of Darlington for vehicles. As a shared zone it would create an unsafe environment for pedestrians and drivers alike.

9. Service Centres
I object to the proposed Service Centre on Shepherd Street as it will bring heavy, loud vehicles onto a residential street. As it will be positioned on the narrowest part of this street, it will also create a dangerous traffic hazard.

A more appropriate location for the Service Centre would be
near the intersection of Shepherd and Cleveland Streets. This would mean the heavy service vehicles could enter and exit from the main arterial road of Cleveland Street and would therefore be kept off residential streets.

I object to many aspects of this SSD application. As a resident of Darlington, I have not been given nearly enough
time to study and comprehend such a huge and complex document as the CIP.

The University should consult properly with the community specifically in regard to the CIP, as they were required to do by the Director General. I look forward to proper consultation with the University prior to this application being approved. During this consultation process residents' views should be listened to and addressed appropriately by the University.

This development program will have a major effect on myself, my family, my neighbours and the entire Darlington community, as well as having effects on the Inner West as a whole. It is not something that I, as a resident of Darlington, take lightly. Please consider this.


Thank you for your time and help,

Nikki
Fiedler

Dear Peter,

We have been granted an extension until 31 March 2014 to make a submission in regard to the above State Significant Development (SSD) application.

We object to the above development application for the following reasons -

1. Failure to comply with Director-General's Requirements
We object to the fact that the University of Sydney has failed to comply with the Director-General's Requirement to consult in the preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) with the local community and in particular with this group, RAIDD.

In the Director-General's Requirements (SSD 13_6123 DGRs.pdf and Modified SSD 13_6123 DGRs Reissued 23.10.2013.pdf) which are included in the documents there is one which says "During the preparation of the EIS, consultation must be undertaken with the relevant Commonwealth Government, State or local authorities, service providers, community groups and affected landowners. In particular you must consult with: ...RAIDD - Residents Acting In Darlington's Defence."

University of Sydney did not consult with the local community prior to submitting its application for Campus Improvement Program 2014-2020 for Camperdown-Darlington.

Furthermore, in Appendix N - Consultation Outcomes, in the document Appendix N_Consultation.pdf, names of RAIDD members are listed as Community Stakeholders, even though they have never been consulted by the University of Sydney in regard to the Environmental Impact Statement of the Campus Improvement Program as directed by the Director-General.

In Table 11 in the EIS the University has listed `Issues Raised' and `CIP Response' as though the issues have been raised in regard to the CIP. However, we repeat that we have never been consulted about the CIP and to present issues raised in regard to other matters as though we have been is grossly misleading and dishonest.

This Development Application should not be considered by Planning NSW at all. The University should be instructed to abide by the Director-General's Requirements and consult properly with the local community, taking into account any issues raised and showing the changes made to address each issue, before resubmitting a new State Significant Development Application to Planning NSW.

2. Time to review Application No: SSD_6123
The University lodged 146 documents in support of its State Significant Development (SSD) application for its Campus Improvement Program 2014-2020. Residents received notice of this application at the beginning of February which gave them until 28 February 2014 to submit a response to Planning NSW. Many residents in Darlington did not receive a notice at all.

Many of the residents have families and full-time jobs and therefore had very little time left in their busy schedules in which to understand something of this magnitude. Giving residents only 4 weeks to absorb a wealth of information, understand the implications it may have on the surrounding community, and formulate a meaningful response was simply unfair and unacceptable.

Clearly, the University had been preparing all these documents over many months and even years. In all that time the University had not consulted with local residents, the people who will be directly affected by what they are proposing in this SSD application, about the CIP in any way whatsoever.

The University said that it will consider submissions up until 31 March 2014. It also put on 3 more token Community Information Sessions during that time. We submit that this was too little and too late.

3. Height, Scale and Location of Buildings
We object to this massive building program which would increase floor space by a massive 68% from 555,600m2 to 937,800m2 with building heights of up to 19 storeys.

The height and bulk of the proposed buildings are too great for the low rise heritage conservation residential precinct in which the University sits.

We object to the proposed 3 storey building in Shepherd Street and the "multidisciplinary building" opposite the Sports Centre both of which will overlook residents homes in Shepherd Street, Calder Road, Lander Street, Boundary Street and Abercrombie Street.

We object to the proposed development of the Regiment Building which will be up to 9 storeys in height. It will result in significant overshadowing of the public housing in Golden Grove Street and also of the Darlington Public School playground.

The University should be required to scale down the size of its proposed buildings and to create green buffer zones between its buildings and residential buildings.

All new buildings should be set back from the street and located well within the University boundaries.

4. Separate Development Applications
We object to all new buildings and any refurbishments of existing buildings within the Campus Improvement Program (CIP) being approved under this one SSD.

Each new building or refurbishment of an existing building should be subject to individual development applications so that the dimensions, scale and use of each building is specified and conditions are imposed upon approval.

5. Population Increase and Infrastructure
We object to the proposed increase in student population from 49,500 to 60,000 by 2020 because the local infrastructure cannot cope with the existing number of people. The plan should be withdrawn until local infrastructure, including footpaths and access to Redfern Station, are improved to cope with the increased population.

6. Vegetation
We object to the University of Sydney's plan to bulldoze Darlington's Eucalypt Grove, an important strand of eucalyptus trees on the campus Shepherd Street car park facing houses in Shepherd Street and Calder Road, and to replace it with a substantial 3 storey building overlooking resident's homes.

The Eucalypt Grove has very significant aesthetic values and provides a refuge for native birds and other wildlife. It has a green hedge along the boundary and provides the only greenery left along the western side of Shepherd St. It is a wonderful asset to the University and the Darlington area.

The University's Ecological Assessment recommends: "Avoid removal of mature trees and protection of trees in proximity to building/refurbishment sites."

7. Noise
We object to the potential increase in noise from plant equipment such as large 24/7 air conditioners and cooling towers on proposed University buildings close to residents' homes.

The University should establish the cumulative noise impact of ALL of its existing buildings before permission is given for further developments to proceed. The University should demonstrate that the cumulative noise impact of all of its buildings complies with environmental legislation before permission for further developments is given.

The NSW Protection of the Environment Operations Act restricts a developer from generating operational noise greater than 5 decibels above the normal background noise level. If the true cumulative impact of University noise were discovered we believe that it is likely that the University would be in breach of the NSW Protection of the Environment Operations Act on a daily basis even without this development.

When the University's former Contract Administration Manager - Mechanical Services, was asked by a resident if all plant equipment complies with environmental laws, he said he didn't know and indicated that it was not his responsibility to find out because the equipment was installed and maintained by outside contractors. This is not acceptable behaviour by the University.

The University should develop a public noise impact policy and maintain effective governance arrangements which ensure compliance with the policy. Residents should not have to complain about each new noise issue before corrective action is taken, if any is taken at all.

Substantial green buffer zones should be created between new university buildings and residents to help reduce the impact of noise.

We also object to the proposed use of Gadigal Green for social events because the noise from such events will adversely affect the amenity of residents living in surrounding streets.

8. Traffic and Parking
We object to the introduction of large car parks on the Darlington campus. With the projected huge increase in the University population coming to the Darlington campus to use these car parks will come the associated problem of traffic congestion on residential streets. The University has not addressed this problem at all.

University staff and students unable or unwilling to use these car parks will end up competing for parking on residential streets in Darlington. It will mean that residents' parking is severely reduced and will also compound the traffic congestion in the area.

We object to the University removing the ability of students and staff to drive through the campus. University traffic should be arriving at and departing from the campus via the main arterial roads such as City Road and Parramatta Road not via the residential streets of Darlington.

The University should be required to encourage short term parking on the larger Camperdown campus not on the Darlington campus.

Currently, University staff and students are taking up much of the parking on residential streets. Residents, and especially elderly residents, should be able to park within reasonable walking distance from their homes.

We object to Butlin Avenue becoming a shared zone between traffic and pedestrians. It is one of the main roads in and out of Darlington for vehicles. As a shared zone it would create an unsafe environment for pedestrians and drivers alike.

9. Heritage
We object to the University's proposal to completely infill the backyards of every heritage listed terrace house (bar 3) from 86 - 130 Darlington Road with 3 storey extensions.

The National Trust has given these terraces an "A" rating - "highly intact". The University should not be allowed to degrade the heritage value of these terraces which are very close to the Golden Grove Conservation Area.

10. Service Centres
We object to the proposed Service Centre on Shepherd Street as it will bring heavy, loud vehicles onto a residential street. As it will be positioned on the narrowest part of this street, it will also create a dangerous traffic hazard.

A more appropriate location for the Service Centre would be near the intersection of Shepherd and Cleveland Streets. This would mean the heavy service vehicles could enter and exit from the main arterial road of Cleveland Street and would therefore be kept off residential streets.

Conclusion

Residents of Darlington have not been given nearly enough time to study and comprehend such a huge and complex document as the CIP. The University has also completely ignored the requirements of the Director General in regard to community consultation.

This Development Application should not be considered by Planning NSW at all. The University should be instructed to abide by the Director-General's Requirements and consult properly with the local community, taking into account any issues raised and showing the changes made to address each issue, before resubmitting a new State Significant Development Application to the Department.

We would be very disappointed if Planning NSW supports this University development application when it has contravened the Department's own requirements.

Let it not be forgotten, the University of Sydney's Darlington Campus sits in a residential precinct; residential Darlington does not sit in a University precinct.

Yours faithfully,

RAIDD (Residents Acting In Darlington's Defence).