Pymble Ladies' College Secondary Innovation Precinct

28306

New South Wales 2073

24/06/2026

Object

Website

Dear NSW Independent Planning Commission I am writing as a local resident of Pymble to formally lodge my strong objection to the proposed six-story educational building development at Pymble Ladies' College. While I support the ongoing educational excellence of local institutions, the scale, environmental footprint, and operational impacts of this specific proposal represent a severe overdevelopment that fails to respect the local planning context, community welfare, and critically endangered local ecosystems. My objections are detailed across four critical areas of concern below. 1. Ecological Impact & Irreversible Canopy Loss Destruction of Mature Canopy: The proposal requires the clear-cutting of mature tree canopy. These trees provide invaluable urban canopy cover, localized cooling, and soil stability. Removing them directly contradicts the NSW Government’s strategic priority to combat the urban heat island effect and expand tree canopy across Greater Sydney. Threat to Endangered Ecological Communities: The subject site is in immediate proximity to, and interfaces with, the Blue Gum High Forest, which is designated as a critically endangered ecological community under both the NSW Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). The Environmental Impact Assessment fails to adequately account for the long-term, indirect, and cumulative downstream impacts of this development—such as altered soil hydrology, extensive root compaction, and contaminated stormwater runoff—on this highly sensitive ecosystem. Fragmentation of Biodiversity Corridors: The removal of these mature trees will permanently sever vital urban wildlife corridors, destroying established habitats for native fauna, including local avian and arboreal species that rely on the contiguous canopy of the Ku-ring-gai municipality. 2. Inappropriate Bulk, Scale, and Visual Amenity Excessive Bulk and Scale (Overdevelopment): A six-story high-rise building is fundamentally incompatible with the zoning objectives of a low-density, established residential neighborhood. It fails to provide an appropriate built-form transition to the surrounding residential context, violating the core character objectives outlined in the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan (LEP) and Development Control Plan (DCP). Overshadowing and Overbearing Visual Impact: The sheer height of the structure will cause unacceptable overshadowing of adjacent residential properties, significantly reducing solar access to private open spaces and living areas. Loss of Visual and Acoustic Privacy: The elevated windows and active spaces of a six-story educational facility introduce direct, elevated overlooking into nearby private backyards and homes, creating a severe, permanent disruption to the visual and acoustic privacy of local residents. 3. Construction Risks and Long-Term Operational Disruptions Excavation and Structural Integrity Risks: The massive excavation required for a building of this magnitude introduces prolonged noise, heavy vibration, and severe dust pollution. Given the local terrain and geology, I demand that a comprehensive, independent Dilapidation Report be legally mandated for all adjacent residential properties prior to any site work to safeguard neighboring foundations against structural cracking. Traffic Congestion and Pedestrian Safety: Local roads are already severely strained during peak morning and afternoon school periods. The introduction of heavy construction transport and worker vehicles will create severe bottlenecks and pose an immediate risk to pedestrian safety, particularly for students walking to local transport links. Traffic Mitigation Mandate: If approved, a strict Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) must be enforced, completely prohibiting heavy vehicle movements during school drop-off and pick-up hours (7:45 AM – 9:00 AM and 3:30 PM – 5:00 PM). 4. Proposed Alternatives and Demands for Amending the Proposal Rather than pursuing a single, high-impact high-rise structure that requires extensive environmental degradation, the applicant should be directed to explore the following alternatives: Adaptive Reuse and Distributed Design: Utilize a decentralized, low-rise, or "stepped" architectural design that follows the natural topography of the land. Capping the height at 2–3 stories would preserve deep-soil zones required to sustain mature vegetation while meeting educational needs. Sensitive Architectural Integration: Re-evaluate existing low-impact footprints on the expansive campus to minimize clear-cutting and ensure any new infrastructure genuinely integrates with, rather than dominates, the local Pymble landscape. Conclusion and Key Demands The proposed development in its current form represents an unacceptable compromise of local environment, heritage, and amenity. I urge the Department to reject the application in its current form and require the applicant to submit a significantly scaled-back proposal that limits building height, protects the Blue Gum High Forest, and preserves our mature urban canopy. Thank you for considering the serious concerns of the local community. I request to be kept informed of any public meetings, assessment reports, and the final determination of this application.