Pollies oppose Patyegarang

Northern Beaches Advocate

Dec 10, 2024 

Local politicians have lined up to oppose the Patyegarang development, also known as Lizard Rock, at Morgan Road, Belrose.

Federal MP Dr Sophie Scamps, Wakehurst MP Michael Regan (main image), Pittwater MP Jacqui Scruby and Davidson MP Matt Cross all made presentations yesterday (Monday, 09 December) at a public meeting of the NSW Government Planning Panel considering the Patyegarang planning proposal, which is known locally as Lizard Rock.

Over a hundred participants were registered to speak, although some did not show up on the day. Each participant was given strict speaking instructions, with individuals allowed two minutes and speakers representing interest groups allowed slightly longer. Speakers began at 9.30am and with only short breaks, continued until all speakers were heard shortly before 4.00pm.

Michael Regan MP (image above), whose electorate of Wakehurst the planning proposal falls within, was the first politician given an opportunity to address the panel. Having run on a platform against the 71 hectare development, he maintained his strong opposition.

“As the Mayor of Northern Beaches Council, the previous government’s decision to allow this development we know as ‘Lizard Rock’ was a big part of my decision to stand for the seat of Wakehurst.

“There can be no doubt about the overwhelming local opposition to this planning proposal. The thousands of submissions, 98 percent opposing the rezoning, clearly show community sentiment. As does the 12,000 strong petition I tabled in parliament last year.

“This comprehensive opposition is based on the fact that this rezoning is not in the public interest. The public interest case opposing this planning proposal can be made on many compelling grounds, which are well canvassed in the submissions,” said Mr Regan.

He laid out a number of detailed technical points, including the failure of the proposal to meet climate change considerations.

Mackellar MP Dr Sophie Scamps (image above) laid out her opposition to the proposal, relying on the submissions of former Fire and Rescue NSW Commissioner Greg Mullins AO AFSM and the NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS).

“In his submission to the proposal, Greg [Mullins] stated in no uncertain terms that, ‘The Patyegarang proposed development should not proceed due to extreme, and worsening, bushfire risk and lack of suitable evacuation paths for residents’.

“The RFS has warned that, ‘the site is in an area that will almost certainly be impacted by significant fire in the future’.

“Independent bushfire reviews commissioned by Northern Beaches Council reaffirmed the inappropriateness of the proposed scale, density and urban design of the site.

“The RFS has stated that the development is likely to be difficult to evacuate during a bushfire due to the density and location of the development in relation to the surrounding road network.

“Approving this development would knowingly put lives at risk — this alone should be reason enough to reject the planned proposal,” said Dr Scamps.

Dr Scamps noted the presence of threatened species within the proposed development area and foreshadowed a referral to the Federal Environment Minister.

Newly-elected Pittwater MP Jacqui Scruby (image above) said her community was against the proposal.

“My background is a former planning and environment lawyer at DLA Piper. I have also been a consultant in climate risk at Energetics, which is an energy and climate consultancy firm.

“The purpose of that context is to say that even though I’m a recently elected member for Pittwater, I have been out and about in the community for a long time listening to community consensus, which is against this proposal.

“In the proponents report for bushfire management, there’s no discussion around long-term considerations. We know we’re facing a climate emergency. We know that the rate, frequency and intensity of bushfires is going to increase over time.

“We know the development is sitting within an extreme bushfire risk area, and so my point is that without considering that long-term time frame, and taking into consideration that the RFS, Greg Mullins and other experts are opposed to development on that basis, would be completely remiss.

“One other thing for the panel to note is we are in a cost of living crisis, and the contribution to bushfire damage as being a huge driver for inflation because of the increased costs of home insurance.

“We know the Actuaries Institute has reported for the last two years, home insurance has increased 32 percent, driving inflation. That’s a direct result of hazards causing devastating impacts to property, which is driving those prices up,” said Ms Scruby.

The last MP given a chance to speak on the proposal was member for Davidson Matt Cross (image above), who has been consistently opposed to the development including when it fell within the Davidson electorate prior to a boundary redistribution.

“Since my election in March 2023, I have had a consistent position in opposition to this planning proposal, as has my predecessor, the Hon. Jonathan O’Dea.

“The first concern is the risk of bushfires. I speak of two recent bushfires in the area close to the location of the planning proposal. These two bushfires are clear evidence of a risk.

“I note that the CSIRO [Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation] in recent times has undertaken building maps to investigate Australia’s bushfire hazards. The CSIRO states that in Belrose the bushfire hazard could increase by between 13 percent and 18 percent in the coming decades.

“We need to protect our natural environment for future generations. The proposal will see 45 football fields of bushland, biodiversity, vegetation and native habitat taken away.

“The planning proposal sits within a wildlife corridor comprising public and private land, alongside the Garigal National Park, Narrabeen Lagoon State Park and the nearby Ku-ring-gai Chase National Park. It is valuable bushland that once rezoned and developed, is gone.

“Sydney needs more housing and an increased housing supply, but it needs to be consistent with existing housing plans. This planning proposal is inconsistent with aspects of the Greater Sydney Region Plan, North District Plan, Northern Beaches Local Strategic Planning Statement — Towards 2040, and Northern Beaches Local Housing Strategy,” said Mr Cross.

The only local politician who has attended more community meetings than Mr Cross is Northern Beaches Greens Councillor Kristyn Glanville (image above), who was one of the original voices of concern when the proposal surfaced in her role with environment group Northern Beaches Envirolink.

“I am speaking today as a volunteer with Envirolink. However, I am also a planning and environment lawyer, and a Councillor on Northern Beaches Council.

“Envirolink remains concerned that this proposal is unsound on biodiversity grounds, and on the grounds of good town planning. We share the concerns of Biodiversity Conservation Services that the proposal does not meet the requirements and obligations of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016.

“From the post exhibition report, Envirolink holds serious concerns that this proposal is unable to properly satisfy the avoid, minimise and offset hierarchy, having regard to the decision in Planners North v Ballina Shire Council and similar decisions.

“Overall, the proposed low-rise, low-density, greenfield proposal, with a yield of 370 homes zoned R2, does not fundamentally avoid or minimise clearing. A different subdivision pattern, a smaller footprint or lower yield, may better demonstrate avoidance.

“By its very nature, a spread out, low-density, subdivision pattern necessitates substantial clearing to form developable blocks, APZs [Asset Protection Zones] and road networks. To put it another way, a subdivision pattern for a compact medium density subdivision could have a similar dwelling yield in 6-9 hectares of clearing, not the proposed 52 hectares.

“Secondly, the proposed R2 zoning is inappropriate to minimise or avoid clearing. At minimum, if it were intended to create a low-density subdivision nestled sensitively amongst native vegetation, then consistently with significant parts of the Northern Beaches, the land ought be zoned C4.

“Envirolink acknowledges that the land was given to the MLALC [Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council] in order to correct past wrongs against Aboriginal people. However, it would be folly to seek to correct a historical injustice by committing new wrongs against nature or new wrongs of building homes where people and property will be at risk of landslip and bushfire,” said Cr Glanville.

Speaking on behalf of Northern Beaches Council, Executive Director of Strategic and Place Planning Malcolm McDonald was given more time to lay out Council’s concerns and subject to questioning by the panel.

Mr McDonald made clear that Council remained firmly opposed to the proposal going forward for rezoning of the land, but in an apparent rearguard action said if the panel were to recommend to the Minister for the site to be rezoned, that a zoning of C4 be considered rather than R2.

He put to the panel that even the proponent of the development agreed that some permissible land uses within R2 would not be suitable for the site, such as child care, and it should therefore have a more appropriate zoning if the panel was intending to proceed over any objections.

Also quizzed by the planning panel was Juliet Grant from consultancy GYDE, who spoke on behalf of the proposal for the proponent (MLALC) who is seeking to develop the land.

She laid out the ways in which the proposal satisfied the criteria for rezoning, specifically that:

• The proposal demonstrates strategic and site-specific merit
• Planning Gateway conditions have been met
• The amended proposal responded to key concerns
• The proposal meets legislative requirements
• The proposal would support MLALC independence

Despite the objections of local politicians, the proposal seems likely to proceed, given the land is one of nine sites acquired by the MLALC through native title claims for the purpose of economic independence.

The ‘Lizard Rock’ site, along with five others, is listed as ‘Northern Beaches Aboriginal Land‘ in a category shown as ‘Priority growth areas and precincts’ by the NSW Government.

Given NSW Planning Minister Paul Scully has previously ruled out any alternative financial compensation for the MLALC, it seems likely the process will continue to its conclusion.

A decision of the panel must be made by Monday, 31 March 2025, but pending the decision to seek further legal review based on matters raised yesterday, may come back prior to Christmas.

Images: Northern Beaches Advocate