FOKE’s Submission – TOD Alternative Scenarios

Read FOKE’s Submission to Ku-ring-gai Council’s public exhibition of alternative scenarios to the Transport Oriented Development (TOD)

Continue reading

Video explaining Alterative TOD Scenarios

Watch the video of Ku-ring-gai Council’s ‘Planning for better outcomes, Alternative Scenarios to the TOD SEPP, On-line Forum 21 November 2024’

Continue reading

Information about the FIVE Scenarios

Ku-ring-gai Council is presenting information forums on five Transport Oriented Development (TOD) rezoning scenario proposals around Roseville, Lindfield, Killara and Gordon stations.

Continue reading

Councils sidelined

Property developers will be able to propose their own spot rezoning and planning controls for large developments, bypassing local councils

Continue reading

Suburban Skyscrapers

The Victorian government says Melbourne by 2050 will be home to nearly 8 million people and as part of a plan to future prove this city it wants to introduce swathes of new housing stock to make it easier for people to buy at home, but critics of the scheme say it threatens Melbourne’s’ reputation as one of the world’s most livable cities.

Continue reading

Housing is complex in Ku-ring-gai too



Housing is more complex than a simple nimby-yimby divide would suggest



READ The Guardian article below:


Australian cities are desperate for the ‘missing middle’ of housing density, 29 October 2024, The Guardian.

But it’s not as simple as the nimby-yimby debate suggests’ author Peter Mares.

He suggests a more sophisticated planning approach is needed to build homes for more people while still providing greenery and open space

Various housing densities in Brisbane. ‘The holy grail of urban consolidation in established suburbs is a shift from free-standing dwellings to European-style, medium-rise apartments.’ Photograph: Darren England/AAP



The Business Council of Australia wants local governments to be stripped of decision-making powers if they fail to meet “basic timeliness requirements” when processing development applications.

The Victorian government is already heading in this direction. It intends to override council planning to fast-track apartment blocks around transport hubs in established suburbs.

There’s a widespread view that local government shoulders responsibility for our housing shortfall because proscriptive regulations enable well-heeled objectors to block or delay projects. Bolder council action on housing would certainly be welcome. But the matter is more complex than a simple nimby-yimby divide would suggest.

Five years ago, Australia was building homes at a rapid clip. More than 215,000 dwellings were completed nationwide in 2018-19 and more than 1m homes in the five years before that, matching the target set in the 2022 housing accord struck by national cabinet soon after the Albanese government took office. If we’d kept building at that pace, we’d get within spitting distance of the accord’s revised target of 1.2m homes by 2029. Now, though, we’re miles away. Last financial year fewer than 175,000 new homes were completed.

It wasn’t “red tape” and local government delays that caused the slowdown in residential construction but changed business conditions.

Covid was followed by supply chain bottlenecks, rising material costs and shortages of skilled labour. Higher interest rates increased the cost of borrowing for developers and made potential buyers wary of buying off the plan. This has a big impact on larger apartment projects, because most developers need to pre-sell 60% to 70% of units to secure finance before they can build. Overseas buyers are an important part of this market, and in 2017 the Coalition government made it harder to get the numbers to stack up by imposing a 50% cap on foreign ownership in new multi-storey buildings with 50 or more apartments. State governments also hit foreign investors with extra fees, including stamp duty surcharges.

Construction will increase if business conditions improve, though that may go hand in hand with rising property prices, which is hardly good news for affordability. The boom-bust cycle that characterises residential development is one reason why more public investment in social housing is so crucial. Apart from providing homes for Australians whose needs aren’t met by the market, public investment helps maintain overall housing supply in a downturn.

Even with greater public investment, planning has a big role to play in helping the private sector to accommodate a growing population – just not in a way that it’s usually understood.

The holy grail of urban consolidation in established suburbs is a shift from free-standing dwellings to European-style, medium-rise apartments that can accommodate many more people while still providing greenery and open spaces. This is the so-called “missing middle”, a much-needed alternative to the high-rise residential towers creating wind tunnels in city centres and the steady march of detached housing rolling over farmlands on the urban fringes.

Yet high-quality urban infill is easier said than done. A significant challenge lies in the fragmented pattern of land ownership that was put in place as our cities grew. A single suburban lot is generally too small to accommodate mid-rise housing built around courtyards or shared gardens. If we are going to meet our housing aspirations, we need to overcome the fragmented pattern of land ownership established in postwar subdivisions. This means a bigger government role to create incentives for blocks to be amalgamated to a scale to allow precinct-level redevelopment.

Detached houses on separate blocks provide plenty of benefits. Back yards provide space for leisure; gardens absorb rainfall, reducing runoff and flood risks and mature trees cool the landscape. But much of our postwar housing stock is no longer fit for purpose. It was built without thought for energy efficiency or the impact of the climate crisis, and intended for larger households than today. Many houses are now underutilised. At the 2021 census more than 1.2m homes had three or more bedrooms “in excess of need”.

Under current settings, these family homes are being demolished one by one. Some make way for two, three or more townhouses squeezed on to a single parcel of land; others are replaced by McMansions. Sometimes the original house is retained but a granny flat added or the block subdivided in a battle-axe arrangement to fit another dwelling.

Such piecemeal redevelopment brings a modest increase in density but with the loss of the very things that make suburban life attractive. Trees are cut down and open space disappears as gardens give way to concrete and brick. The ad hoc nature of this redevelopment also makes it harder for local and state governments to ensure services and infrastructure can keep pace with population growth.

We are at risk of getting the worst of all worlds. More high-rise towers in the centre and around train stations and more urban sprawl on the fringes, combined with the loss of amenity in established suburbs as existing houses are gradually replaced by piecemeal redevelopment. We need a strategic approach to facilitate well-designed medium rise development at a scale that accommodates more people, creates shared open space and preserves greenery. We need more sophisticated planning, not less.

Peter Mares is a fellow at the Centre for Policy Development and the author of No Place Like Home: Repairing Australia’s Housing Crisis

Housing is complex in
Ku-ring-gai too



READ the FOKE article below that REFLECTS & RESPONDS to The Guardian article by Peter Mares, 29 October 2024

FOKE is calling for a more sophisticated planning approach for Ku-ring-gai.

One that builds a sustainable, liveable, net zero and affordable home future whilst still preserving its high biodiversity – bush turkeys live amongst the Gordon Railway Station Gardens – and its beautiful gardened, tall tree lined streets and bushland landscape. It has been characterised as where the natural form dominates the built form. No where else in Sydney has Ku-ring-gai’s tall dominating Blue Gums that fill the sky with its large canopy branches.

Indeed, in an age of biodiversity collapse we should be providing even more ‘greenery’ that restores, rejuvenates and builds resilience to Ku-ring-gai’s urban forests. They are essential for Sydney and renowned as the ‘lungs of Sydney’.

Ku-ring-gai’s tree canopy, rich biodiversity needs urgent protection. It is where the last remaining critically Endangered Ecological Community of Blue Gum High Forest and Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest is left on the planet. It is a haven for wildlife who utterly depend on Ku-ring-gai’s tree canopy for hollows – that takes decades to form, as well as for food, nesting and survival. Ku-ring-gai is a rare urban Sydney Forest that needs planning controls that ensure its survival into the future.

FOKE has always challenged the holy grail of urban consolidation particularly for Ku-ring-gai with its garden heritage suburbs created by the North Shore railway line.

Four consecutive railway stations – Roseville, Lindfield, Killara, Gordon – along that railway line are now designated as Transpor Oriented Developments (TODs). These blunt 400 metre concentric circled maps designate the location of six storey apartment infill development. Yet this “missing middle” threatens to wipe out what many consider an environmentally sensitive area as well as a place that has some of the best domestic architecture in the country.

The railway line that created Ku-ring-gai’s heritage is now threatening to destroy this golden era of free-standing Federation, inter-war and 20th Century architecture.

The North Shore railway line is also on a rising ridgeline with its western side steeply sloping downwards into the Lane Cove National Park. Its eastern side slopes into the Garigal National Park.

Another reason that makes Ku-ring-gai unique. Ku-ring-gai is essentially a catchment to three surrounding national parks. It is a wildlife corridor between national parks and bushland valleys connecting the North Shore to the Hawkesbury to the north, Parramatta to the west and the Northern Beaches to the east.

Ku-ring-gai’s steep terrain and ridge-top development leads to greater flood risk from flash flooding. It is also a highly prone bushfire area.

Yet for past decades Ku-ring-gai’s geographic and ecological constraints have been blatantly ignored.

Ku-ring-gai’s environmental splendour has been significantly eroded in the last two decades as it has taken its fair share of medium density that has been built by demolishing swaths of potential heritage areas and ‘gardened and tall treed wildlife connectivity’. Its natural dominated landscape has been replaced by concrete, hard surface medium-rise apartments. And now locals fear more will be lost forever and irreversibly concrete the landscape forever.

The NSW government is determined to prioritise housing supply at all costs. It is determined to override local government democratic council planning to fast-track apartment blocks around transport hubs in the garden suburbs of Ku-ring-gai.

The acronym ‘TOD’ (Transport Oriented Development) has entered the language. It was created in late 2023 when the NSW Government announced its signature high density policy across Greater Sydney. It undemocratically bypassed Council zoning controls.

Researchers Peter Mares acknowledges that housing is more complex than ‘the simple nimby-yimby divide’ would suggest. Yet few understand the complexity of housing in Ku-ring-gai.

The “missing middle”, a description that describes medium density (around 6 storeys) is hailed as a solution to high-rise residential towers. Yet this too can have devastating consequences for established garden suburbs like Ku-ring-gai with its Heritage Conservation Areas and heritage homes. How can residential heritage houses and streetscapes be respected, protected and appreciated into the future if it has a six storey apartments towering over them?

Detached houses on separate blocks are the fabric of Ku-ring-gai’s heritage. It is what protects the tree canopy for the majority of Blue Gums grow on private land ie front and back yards.

The space around a detached home not only provides space for leisure; create amenity and absorb rainfall and keeps us cool. It is essential for reducing stormwater runoff into three national parks that surround Ku-ring-gai and infesting it with weeds and increasing water pollution that stops people swimming on our beaches.

It is misleading to say that Ku-ring-gai’s postwar housing stock is no longer fit for purpose. They have been solidly built – mostly in double brick. The demolition of these houses and the razing of garden blocks exacerbates the climate crisis. The smaller homes and garden flats are often affordable, but they are increasingly being demolished for larger houses for the same number of households. The new concrete buildings are big carbon emitters.

With Exempt and Complying development many family homes are being demolished, replaced by ever expensive McMansions. One sold for nearly $10 million dollars? How can that be?

Subdivisions basically eliminate the necessary space for Ku-ring-gai’s tall canopy trees.

Twenty years ago, residents described urban densification as the ‘rape of Ku-ring-gai’. Today some are saying it will be the ‘death of Ku-ring’-ai’. Ku-ring-gai’s remaining natural landscape will be bulldozed, razed, destroyed and transformed into a bland, homogenous. 21st Century airport architecture hard surface inner city dwelling. The trees will go. The birds will go and we will be left wondering how did we let this all happen?. Ku-ring-gai’s local character and precious environment will be lost forever.

With perpetual population growth, local and state governments will never be able keep up with demands for new open space, playgrounds, schools, hospitals and other services and infrastructure.

The ‘hungry giant’ is never satisfied. When will the high rise rezonings stop? Nor will the urban densification stop the urban sprawl on the fringes.

FOKE is calling for a more sophisticated planning approach for Ku-ring-gai. And that might mean that we need to start having a mature conversation about how we are to achieve a sustainable long-term future that challenges ‘forever growth’ that will kill us all.




References

https://www.krg.nsw.gov.au/files/assets/public/v/1/hptrim/information-management-publications-public-website-ku-ring-gai-council-website-planning-and-development/ku-ring-gai-local-character-background-study-broad-local-character-areas-report.pdf

https://www.krg.nsw.gov.au/Planning-and-development/Planning-policies-and-guidelines/Strategies-and-management-plans/Ku-ring-gai-Urban-Forest-Strategy

https://www.cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au/strategies-action-plans/urban-forest-strategy

https://blog.mipimworld.com/guide-green-real-estate/green-real-estate-role-urban-forests-city-sustainability/

.





Stay in Touch

Sign up for FOKE E-News HERE

info@foke.org.au

https://www.facebook.com/friendsofkuringgai/

“Every place is going to change”

It was confirmed that “Every place is going to change”, whether communities liked it or not, at a recent planning industry forum

Continue reading

Ku-ring-gai a place of high biodiversity

Ku-ring-gai is a place of high biodiversity. It is one of the few areas of Sydney that still retains its majestic carbon-rich urban forests, tree canopy, bushland valleys and stunning displays of gardens that are wildlife corridors and habitat for unique mammals, birds, reptiles, frogs and insects. It is also surrounded by three national parks.

This is something the NSW Government should celebrate and conserve. Yet the NSW Government is determined to destroy it – even in the midst of a biodiversity crisis.

Watch Ku-ring-gai Council’s Urban Forest EnviroTube below:




What is causing the degradation and loss of Ku-ring-gai’s biodiversity?

  • habitat being destroyed and broken up (fragmented) due to land clearing for houses and apartments
  • introduction of invasive plants, animals, and diseases as a result of urban densification
  • climate change
  • pollution (chemicals, sediments, plastics, light and sound)


Ku-ring-gai is of national significance and should also be protected by the Federal Government.

2020Australia’s Sixth National Report to the Convention on Biological Diversity
July 2022Tanya Plibersek, Federal Environment Minister commits Australia to protecting 30% of its lands and 30% of oceans by 2030
Nov 2022UN climate summit kept alive hopes of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius
Dec 2022Australian Government joins 195 other nations in signing onto the adopted the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF). The target of GBF is to protect at least 30% of the world’s land, freshwater and ocean ecosystems by 2030 (‘30×30’) – a target both the Australian Federal government and NSW Government committed to domestically
Dec 2023NSW Government announced its Transport Oriented Development program, Low to Mid Rise Housing and Dual Occupancies that will effectively upzone Ku-ring-gai by 90% and destroy its tree canopy




Stay in Touch

Sign up for FOKE E-News HERE

info@foke.org.au

https://www.facebook.com/friendsofkuringgai/

Authorised by K. Cowley, 1 Kenilworth Road, Lindfield, NSW, 2070

Destroy Trees. Destroy Civilisation

The lessons of Easter Island seem to have been forgotten. Destroy trees. Destroy civilisation.

Continue reading

Labor’s housing plans will fail

Scott Farlow MLC, Shadow Minister for Planning and Public Spaces, spoke at the Save Greater Sydney Coalition Forum ‘Getting Housing Right: Why it Matters – without the spin’

Continue reading

Labor’s housing approach is a failure

Scott Farlow MLC, Shadow Minister for Planning and Public Spaces, will speak at the Housing Crisis Forum on Wed 7th August at the NSW Parliament Theatrette 6.30pm

Continue reading

Update on Ku-ring-gai Housing Policy

For those Ku-ring-gai residents attending the Housing Crisis Forum on Wed 7th August at the NSW Parliament Theatrette 6.30pm this Mayoral Minute provides an important update

Continue reading

Support Disallowance Bill

Please write letters to the Upper House Crossbench calling on them to SUPPORT The Hon. Scott Farlow, MLC & Shadow Minister for Planning’s DISALLOWANCE BILL opposing the Transport Oriented Development (TOD) program across Greater Sydney, including in Ku-ring-gai.  

Continue reading

Sydney’s ‘land banking’ crisis

Read Greg Callaghan’s article ‘Left to rot: The ‘ghost homes’ scourge in our big cities – amid a housing crisis, Sydney Morning Herald, 13 July 2024

Continue reading

Vale Don Brew

FOKE member Don Brew (1935 – 2024) was honoured by Ku-ring-gai Council for his fearless and dedicated advocacy for Ku-ring-gai’s heritage.

Continue reading

Hope – Interim Heritage Order

Ku-ring-gai Council is working hard to protect Ku-ring-gai’s 23 Heritage Conservation Areas.

Continue reading

It’s YOUR home. YOU don’t have to sell

The Transport Oriented Development and Well-Located Housing SEPPs have triggered a surge of interest among developers, leading to a frenzy of activity akin to a gold rush. Developers are increasingly reaching out to homeowners with offers to secure “Option Contracts” for the future purchase of their land.

Continue reading

Despair – Low- & Mid-rise Housing & Dual Occupancies

Thanks to all who attended Ku-ring-gai Council’s community forums on the NSW Government’s Low and Mid-Rise Housing plans.  

Continue reading

Minns forgets his “avalanche of many ugly, poorly built developments” speech


FOKE wishes to remind Premier Chris Minns what he said on the floor of the Legislative Assembly on 8 August 2018 about planning for Greater Sydney.


Read the full speech on Hansard

Read Premier Minns and his TOD SEPP by:

Paul Scully, MP, Minister for Planning & Public Spaces State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) Amendment (Transport Oriented Development) 2024 under the Environmental and Planning Act 1979 HERE

18 June, 2024

TOD Disallowance Bill


Read more about the TOD Disallowance Bill HERE

Scott Farlow, MLC & Shadow Minister for Planning, has introduced a Private members Bill into the Legislative Council. This Bill is the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to enable State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) Amendment (Transport Oriented Development) 2024. The aim is to disallow the Transport Oriented Development (TOD) program that is a blunt and one-size-fits all instruments that will have catastrophic impacts on Ku-ring-gai s tree canopy, environment, heritage and amenity.  

On 5th June 2024, Scott Farlow said:

“The Coalition supports measures, including increasing density along transport corridors, to meet ambitious housing targets, but they must be done right and in consultation with local communities. This has not been the case with the Transport Oriented Development State Environmental Planning Policy, which provided no opportunity for community consultation despite increased community participation being an object of the Act”.

Read FULL STATEMENT HERE

The Bill will be introduced into the Legislative Council.

Please urge MLCs to vote for the TOD Disallowance Bill.

Please ADAPT and EDIT in your own words the letter below:

Then send the email to each member of the crossbench asking them to support the Disallowance Bill.

Their contact emails are HERE



Read TOD SEPP by:

Paul Scully, MP, Minister for Planning & Public Spaces State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) Amendment (Transport Oriented Development) 2024 under the Environmental and Planning Act 1979 HERE



18 June, 2024

Ku-ring-gai remains steadfast on TOD legal action

FOKE thanks Ku-ring-gai Councillors who voted to continue the legal action against the NSW Governments undemocratic and environmentally and heritage destructive Transport Oriented Development (TOD) program.

A majority of nine councillors stood steadfast in their support to continue the legal action against the TOD.  

Watch Ku-ring-gai Council meeting HERE.

Since coming into effect on 13 May, 2024, the TOD continues to cause anguish, distress and despair for residents and particularly to those living within 400 metres of Gordon, Killara, Lindfield and Roseville Stations.  

The TOD will allow 6 to 7 storey apartment buildings on most sites within 400 metres of Gordon, Killara, Lindfield and Roseville railway stations.

Residents remain in shock to think that a NSW Government would allow Ku-ring-gai’s unique and irreplaceable heritage and environment to be so willfully destroyed by developers.

Many residents are now being threatened with financial and housing insecurity. Those living within the TOD are being pressured to sell their properties with threats that if they don’t their properties will be devalued.

Ku-ring-gai Councillors know they have no choice but to take legal action.  The NSW Government has shown no indication that they will negotiate with Council.  Instead, Minns appears determined to push through this undemocratic TOD hyper-overdevelopment SEPP that will be catastrophic for not only Ku-ring-gais heritage and environment but NSWs.

It is pleasing to hear that the NSW Liberals are prepared to overturn the TOD program.  

We now have hope that Councils legal challenge and the Coalitions Disallowance Bill will stop the disastrous TOD.

Postscript

Read TOD SEPP by:

Paul Scully, MP, Minister for Planning & Public Spaces State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) Amendment (Transport Oriented Development) 2024 under the Environmental and Planning Act 1979 HERE

11 June, 2024

FOKE’s evidence to TOD Inquiry


FOKE was invited to give evidence to the NSW Parliament’s Upper House Inquiry into the development of the Transport Oriented Development Program (TOD) on Monday 20 May 2024 in the Macquarie Room, Parliament House, Sydney.  

FOKE concluded its evidence calling on the NSW Government to immediately withdraw the TOD program because of the devastation it will cause not only to the natural, built and cultural heritage of Ku-ring-gai but for Greater Sydney.

During FOKEs session from 12.15 pm, Mr Frank Howarth AM (Chair, Heritage Council of NSW); Mr David Burden (Conservation Director, National Trust of Australia (NSW) and Ms Jozefa Sobski AM (Vice President, Haberfield Association Inc) presented evidence as well.

Following FOKE’s presentation the Save Greater Sydney Coalition (SGSC) which FOKE is a member of, presented their evidence.  It was a powerful presentation!

Read list of speakers at Upper House TOD Inquiry 20.5.24 HERE

Watch video of FOKE’s evidence to the Upper House TOD Inquiry Hearing 20.5.24 HERE

Read transcript of FOKE’s evidence to the Upper House TOD Inquiry Hearing 20.5.24 HERE

Read FOKEs Submission to the TOD Inquiry 27.3.24 HERE

Read further information about the Upper House Inquiry HERE

Postscript

Read TOD SEPP by:

Paul Scully, MP, Minister for Planning & Public Spaces State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) Amendment (Transport Oriented Development) 2024 under the Environmental and Planning Act 1979 HERE





Ku-ring-gai’s WAKE UP letter to NSW residents

READ Ku-ring-gai’s open letter to NSW residents, published in early May 2024:

An open letter to NSW residents – WAKE UP

We’ve all heard about the NSW Government’s plans for increased housing. But no-one has heard anything about how our schools, hospitals, roads and parks are meant to support this population growth.

Read full letter HERE

Save Sydney Rally

RALLY Save our Suburb 12th March Sydney Domain Ipm


ON Tuesday 12 March 2024 1pm

AT Tree of Knowledge behind Parliament House, Hospital Road, Domain. Map here.

PROTEST against the new planning laws proposed by the NSW Government.

THREATENS every suburb across Greater Sydney, Blue Mountains, Central Coast, Lower Hunter, Greater Newcastle and Illawarra-Shoalhaven.

BRIING banners identifying your suburb or council area.

SPEAKERS will include MPs, Mayors & Community representatives.

SHARE with your networks, community groups, neighbours, friends and family.

VISIT SAVE GREATER SYDNEY COALITION  Website & Facebook 

CONTACT KATHY COWLEY, President, FOKE, info@foke.org.au for more information



TOD Inquiry Announced

The NSW Parliament has announced an Upper House Inquiry into the Development of the Transport Orientated Development Program (TOD).

Submissions are due on 28 March 2924.

The TOD Program will devastate Ku-ring-gais heritage conservation areas and environmentally sensitive lands particularly the 400 metres surrounding Roseville, Lindfield, Killara and Gordon Stations.

Both the TOD Program and the Low and Mid-rise Housing State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) will include a “non-refusal” standard which will disallow Ku-ring-gai Council heritage and environmental controls.

The TODs 3:1 FSR and 6-7 + storey heights (with no minimum lot size or lot width) will effectively wipe out Heritage Conservation Areas and remove critically endangered Blue Gum High Forest (BGHF) and Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest (STIF) in Roseville, Lindfield, Killara and Gordon. 

The Upper House Committee consist of:

Chair: Sue Higginson MLC (GREENS)
Deputy Chair:  John Ruddick MLC (LDP)

Members: 
Mark Buttigieg MLC (ALP)
Anthony D’Adam MLC (ALP)
Scott Farlow MLC (LIBERAL)
Jacqui Munro MLC (LIBERAL)
Peter Primrose MLC (ALP)

The Terms of Reference can be found here.

It is critical that as many submissions be sent in by members of the community.

Say NO to NSW Government

Send your submission HERE by deadline Friday 23 February, 2024

Ideas to help you send your submission:

The NSW Minns Government planning ‘reforms’:


  • are grossly UNDEMOCRATIC.

  • are flawed. They undermine the integrity of the entire NSW PLANNING system and will lead to planning chaos.

  • will destroy the character, heritage and environment of Sydney’s diverse suburbs with a “one size fits all policy”.

  • fails to consider local amenity impacts, including overshadowing, loss of privacy, loss of scenic views, loss of streetscape.

  • fail to ensure good quality and good designed apartment buildings.
  • put the interests of property developers before the COMMUNITY.

  • will allow super windfall rezoning profits to be ‘gifted’ to property developers.

  • will not address the housing affordability crisis.

  • will open the NSW planning system to “corruption risk” with the introduction of the ‘non-refusal standards’ (including money-laundering).

  • deny natural justice for those residents living within a  Transport Oriented Development (TOD) with no opportunity to object.  

  • deny natural justice for those residents living across Sydney with the introduction of the Changes to create low and mid-rise housing occurring just before the Christmas, New Year and school holidays.

  • lack transparency and accountability. The Minns Government refuses to release the “Cabinet in confidence“ evidence justifying why Roseville, Lindfield, Killara and Gordon had the necessary infrastructure to take further density.   the TOD to be introduced 400 metres surrounding Roseville, Lindfield, Killara, Gordon Railway Stations can take the increase in density.

  • are environmentally irresponsible when Sydney’s natural ENVIRONMENT is under severe with the escalating threats of climate and biodiversity extinction.

  • fail to acknowledge Sydney’s environment interconnections. Ku-ring-gai is the lungs of Sydney. What happens to Ku-ring-gai’s trees will impact on Western Sydney’s, Northern Beaches, Sydney Harbour’s and the Hawkesbury River’s environmental health.

  • will devastate Ku-ring-gai’s natural environment with the overriding of existing Council protections including Tree & Vegetation Development Control Plan (DCP), Urban Forest Policy, Threatened Species Community.
  • Fail to acknowledge Ku-ring-gai as an environmentally sensitive area.  

  • Fail to acknowledge Ku-ring-gai’s Aboriginal heritage that is a local government area that has one of the most significant Aboriginal sites in Sydney.

  • will push Ku-ring-gai’s Critically Endangered Ecological Communities (Blue Gum High Forest, Sydney Turpentine Ironbark and Duffys Forest) and its wildlife and birdlife to extinction (Federal Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act).

  • will destroy Ku-ring-gai’s tree canopy. Already Ku-ring-gai’s tree canopy is under serious threat with an 8-9% slash in tree canopy cover. The NSW Housing Strategy will accelerate this destruction. It will destroy the vital wildlife corridor/national park railway line ridge.

  • will have an adverse impact on Lane Cove National Park, Garigal National Park, Ku-ring-gai Chase National Park. As well the integrity of the remaining pockets of intact Blue Gum High Forest at the Dalrymple-Hay Nature Reserve (St Ives), Sheldon Forest (Turramurra) will be placed under pressure. Other bushland reserves include Ku-ring-gai Flying-Fox Reserve (within 400 metres of Gordon Railway Station), Granny Springs Reserve (Turramurra), Swain Garden, Seven Little Australians Park.

  • ignores Ku-ring-gai’s geography. geology and climate. Ku-ring-gai suburbs are located on a thin ‘railway line’ ridge that climbs to about 200 metres and has the highest rainfall in Sydney. There are many creeks running from this ridge east and west, flowing down into either the Lane Cove, Garigal or Ku-ring-gai National Parks. The canopy trees, bushland reserves, gardens are environmentally critical to the survival of these national parks. The NSW housing policies will lead to more intensive hard surfaces.  During high rainfall events this will lead to flash flooding, with pollutants, rubbish and weeds being flushed into the National Parks.
  • will result in wildlife extinction. Ku-ring-gai has more native species than the entire United Kingdom. Ku-ring-gai is a hot bed of biological diversity that supports over 800 native plants, 170 fungi and 690 fauna species (including the threatened species – Grey-Headed Flying Fox and Powerful Owl.

  • ignores the evidence that Ku-ring-gai is one of Sydney’s most ecologically sensitive places.

  • Fail to provide an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) regarding the  multiple rezonings since 2004 when the last major rezonings occurred as LEP 194.

  • will demolish Ku-ring-gai’s hard won HERITAGE Conservation Areas that includes the nation’s best 20th Century domestic architecture.

  • fail to acknowledge and respect the character, heritage and environment of a local area. They are blunt, one-size-fits all changes that will irreversibly destroy a community’s liveability, character, heritage and the environment.

  • abrogate NSW’s obligations to protect individual heritage items (eg Eryldene)  and Heritage Conservation Areas . If allowed it means that heritage protection will be extinguished across NSW.

  • will destroy Ku-ring-gai’s heritage where the ‘natural dominates the built form’. Ku-ring-gai’s garden and bushland suburbs will be demolished and replaced with hard surface concrete.

  • fails to recognise Ku-ring-gai’s significance to the Australia’s cultural, natural and environmental pioneer history. Ku-ring-gai is the birthplace of the modern Australian environment movement with environmental pioneers such as Annie Wyatt (founder of the National Trust of Australia), Charles Bean, Eccleston du Faur, Alex Colley, Paddy Pallin.

  • will overwhelm existing ageing INFRASTRUCTRE for stormwater, sewerage and drinking water, train carrying capacity.

  • fails to address the risks that Ku-ring-gai faces from climate fueled bushfires, wild storms and flash flooding.
  • will cause continual traffic congestion chaos. Ku-ring-gai has limited access roads to the Pacific Highway. In an emergency how will the ambulance get to the hospital? Streets will be impassible with additional carparking.

  • are silent on controls to ensure new multistorey developments have net zero emissions with roof top solar and community batteries for the high energy required for lifts and air conditioning.

  • fail to provide the funds to purchase additional land for more parks, playgrounds, green spaces, sporting fields, swimming pools as well as services such as schools, hospitals, libraries and community and recreational facilities.

  • fail to acknowledge that over the past 20+ years, Ku-ring-gai Council’s attempts to strengthen the protection of Ku-ring-gai’s heritage and the environment have been ignored, denied or delayed by the NSW Planning Department (eg 10/50 vegetation clearing rule). Concurrently environment, heritage and local government powers have been significantly weakened. It is time to strengthen urban environmental protections – not extinguish them.

NSW Labor DETERMINED TO DESTROY KU-RING-GAI

“You have something special here in Ku-ring-gai. Fight for it.” – Tom Uren

Ku-ring-gai is about to be destroyed.

It is now time for residents to fight for Ku-ring-gai.

The NSW Government is planning to destroy Ku-ring-gai – its tree canopy, its heritage homes and its character.

IT IS IMPORTANT for residents to:

a) complete a Ku-ring-gai Council online survey about their say on the planning changes

b) send feedback to the State Government’s planning department here.

THE DEADLINE IS FRIDAY 23 FEBRUARY, 2024.

The NSW Government proposes dual occupancies in low density residential zones on block sizes of 450sqm. A block of 900 sqm will allow four homes to be built on it.

The NSW Government’s blanket zonings will allow terraces, townhouses, manor houses (two storey apartment blocks) and 6 to 7 storey mid-rise apartment blocks to be built within walking distance of railway stations. Possibly too for Ku-ring-gai’s local centres – East Killara, East Lindfield, West Gordon, West Pymble, West Lindfield, South Turramurra, North Turramurra?

Ku-ring-gai’s future will be dramatically different – traffic congestion, high rise with the removal of thousands of trees. Heat stress turbocharged. Wildlife extinguished. Heritage erased.

In April 2024 the NSW Government plans to implement ‘Transport Oriented Development’ (TOD).

TOD allows blanket 6 to 7 storey unit developments within 400m of the Roseville, Lindfield, Killara and Gordon railway stations. Eight to nine storeys will be allowed if developers provide “affordable housing”.

Heritage Conservation Areas WILL NOT BE PROTECTED.

The NSW Government has indicated it will NOT CONSULT Ku-ring-gai residents over its TOD high rise rezoning changes.

For more information see Ku-ring-gai Council: ‘Proposed changes to NSW housing policy and its impacts on Ku-ring-gai’.

NSW Government announces intentions for MORE HOUSING DENSITY

At the last Ku-ring-gai Council meeting, less than two weeks before Christmas 2023, Mayor Ngai tabled a Mayoral Minute : “The Trickle of Information Regarding Housing Density Changes – Tuesday 12 December 2023”about the State Government’s  intentions for more housing density for Ku-ring-gai.  

Below is FOKE’s summary of the Mayoral Minute.  The full Mayoral Minute can be read here.

The State Government intends to legislate two State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs) to override Ku-ring-gai Council planning controls. 

1. SEPP relating to “diverse and well-located homes”

The NSW Government has announced it intends to legislate new planning controls to allow terraces and townhouses from being built in R2 Low Density Residential zones and residential flat buildings (apartments) to being built in R3 Medium Density Residential zones.

This would shift the goalposts with unintended consequences on infrastructure, planning, and biodiversity.

It is understood that if this “diverse and well-located homes” SEPP is legislated by the NSW Government it will:
• increase housing density within 800m walking distance to a well-located area’, ie  close to existing train stations and town centre precincts (it remains unclear as to whether local neighbourhood centres will be includes)
• Multi-dwelling houses to be allowed in R2 zones within 800m walking distance of well located areas
• 6 storey apartments to be allowed in R3 zones within 400m walking distance of well located areas
• 3 storey apartments to be allowed in R3 zones within 800m walking distance of well located areas and
• Dual occupancies to be allowed anywhere else in NSW zoned R2.

A letter sent to Ku-ring-gai Council from the Department of Planning on 16th July 2021, indicates it wants Council to implement ‘medium density’ (then townhouses) in Roseville, Roseville Chase, Killara, Pymble, Wahroonga, West Gordon and North St Ives.

2. SEPP relating to “transport oriented development”
• The SEPP intends to allow 6 storey apartments on any zoned land within 400m of each train station, although it has not been confirmed whether this is 400m walking distance or 400m radius
• The planning controls will allow building heights of 6 storeys (21m) with a floor space ratio of 3:1
• New parking rates will apply
• No minimum lot size or lot width rules will apply and developments in commercial areas must make sure street frontages are activated
• The State Government does not believe further support for infrastructure is necessary
• The SEPP will apply to Heritage Conservation Areas, although details on this remains unknown
• The SEPP will designate each area as “special entertainment precincts” with venues trading later and exempt from normal rules about amplified music.


Ku-ring-gai Council has responded with concerns about: 
• The lack of consideration for infrastructure (transport, stormwater, education and recreation)
• The significant loss of tree-canopy, which is vital to protecting biodiversity as well as to support climate-change resilience
• The potential impacts to the character of Sydney, including impacts to our Heritage Conservation Areas
• The lack of detail publicly available on either SEPP
• The perceived rush to implement each SEPP
• The perceived lack of public consultation regarding the above.

The situation is compounded by the State Government’s withdrawal of $9.8m funding for the Lindfield Village Hub commuter carpark, which has put the project in jeopardy, delayed the delivery of housing, and sabotaged the good faith efforts of both Council and the potential developer.

Recommendation:
A. That Council notes this Mayoral Minute, awaits the release of detail on each SEPP, and continues to voice its concerns both individually and in co-operation with other local councils and industry bodies such as LGNSW and NSROC.

B. That as soon as practicable after the public release of detailed information on each SEPP, Council will inform the residents of the impacts of proposed changes as well as any public feedback or consultation mechanisms available to them. Council will also respond as necessary to protect the interests of current and future residents of Sydney.

Heritage Act Reforms

In May 2021, the NSW Government announced a major review of the Heritage Act, 1977 which would contribute to its legislative reform.

The NSW Heritage Act is the single most important instrument in our state that identifies, protects and conserves our heritage and we believe should only be strengthened.

FOKE participated in a National Trust Forum on the Government’s Discussion Paper on the 9th May with 277 experts, heritage organisations and other participants.

We believe the current Heritage Act is very robust and working well and needs only minor updating.

The stated intention of the review is to make heritage ownership easier, more affordable and maximising a heritage item’s economic value.  

Our main concern is that the discussion paper intends to water down the current Heritage Act’s conservation and protection measures. Under the rationale for the review, the prescriptive controls which have helped conserve and protect heritage items are cited as outdated, with no real comment as to best practice improvements or any strengthening of the Act.

Rather the paper recommends a ‘nuanced’ approach to heritage controls, which will only lead to individual interpretations resulting in legal battles among residents, developers and local and state planning controls. Prescriptive controls have proven to be successful in other countries such as the UK.

The key areas supported in our submission relate to the need to address Aboriginal Heritage, the ability to issue penalty infringement notices for non-compliance or wilful deterioration of a heritage item, and financial incentives for funding conservation.

The issues raised that are not supported are streamlining the delisting process, and extending the levels of heritage protection into four categories.

However, the Act would benefit by excluding heritage from State Significant Developments, which currently can override the provisions of the Heritage Act. As we have just seen with the removal of Willow Grove to make way for the Parramatta Powerhouse museum.

Similarly, Heritage items should have a significant conserved perimeter where no development is allowed. Most heritage is an item in a setting that adds to its value and historic validity, hence the area surrounding it needs to be similarly protected.

Why are only 4% of the 40,000 State Heritage Inventory Items actually listed on the Heritage Register?

The Heritage Council is adding fewer and fewer items each year. Without protection these items will be lost. The National Trust (NSW) have listed over 100 buildings and places that in their view warrant State Heritage listing which the Heritage Office has not registered.

Heritage assessment and relevance to local, state or national significance should be maintained. Any proposed amendments should result in better heritage outcomes rather than a weakening of heritage protections.