Precincts in Hornsby

by Hornsby Council 8 Mar 2010, 12:31pm

Council is trying to encourage more housing close to shops and train stations in Hornsby. Do you support this approach? Do you have any comments?

This online discussion forum has concluded. You can still browse the site but the discussion area will no longer accept new comments or votes.

Ic_relatesdoc Relates to document: Hornsby precincts (5.438 MB)

Comments (195) Expand All Replies

Radas Comment 1 14 Mar 2010, 11:09 AM

Social aspect

Council is showing no social responsibility.

Where do the elderly and lower-income people all go?

The current stock of housing in the precinct is suitable for the elderly who cannot drive because of age or financial constraints. Replacing the existing blocks with new 20-story apartment will force them to go - where?

As an indicator, the older-style three-level apartments have a typical strata levy of $500-600 per quarter for a two-bedroom apartment (equivalent to paying rent of $50

per week, even if you own the property outright) . The newer-style high-rises have levies of $100 per week for a two-bedder (and this will increase after the new building

honeymoon period) so effectively you will be marginalizing those who already live in the precinct by forcing them out, and then overseeing a spiral of upward pricing for the

privilege of living near Hornsby.

Keep the old blocks near Hornsby

xfactor Comment 1.1 15 Mar 2010, 3:25 PM

The area Council proposed for housing around Hornsby Town Centre for 20 storey Great Walls is outrageous. This precinct should ideally be kept between 3 to 7 storeys. If Council is serious about young families and the elderly living around the area they should not rezone the Linda Street precinct and leave it as is. These 3 storey walk-ins are much appreciated to the young and elderly because they can’t afford to buy expensive luxury tall apartments with ridiculous strata levies. If you look at all the high rises in Chatswood, people who buy them are rich migrants, investors and speculators, apartment prices there are going off the roof. This will not solve the housing shortage crisis, in fact it will make it worse driving sections of the community out of the area and will never afford owning a home. Hornsby does not deserve this.

res12 Comment 1.2 17 Mar 2010, 11:56 AM

Totally agree - plus the letter the council sent out to residents in the affected precincts stated that rates are going to rise (not maybe, will) due to land re-evaluations. This, plus higher rents and higher unit prices if this goes ahead means a lot of people will inevitably be forced out of Hornsby.

Rapid_Endurance77 Comment 1.2.1 4 Apr 2010, 9:34 AM

Precisely - It's clearly in contrary to the whole point of Council's supposed methodology which is to: "allow for elderly people to downsize and for singles and young couples to enter the property market!"

Radas Comment 1.3 18 Mar 2010, 11:48 PM

From "Searle G. Sydney’s urban consolidation experience: power, politics and community. Research Paper 12. Brisbane: Griffith University, Urban Research Program, 2007"

found at

http://www.griffith.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/48600/urp-rp12-searle-2007.pdf

See article for original sources. Quotes:

"...social composition varies according to consolidation type, with low rise flats having the highest proportions of low income and lone person households, and which policy has seemingly not taken into account. Children are generally a low proportion of the population of flats, and this and high mobility rates among flat dwellers make planning goals of social sustainability and social cohesion more problematic in higher density developments"

"In the Sydney case, urban consolidation has failed to more…

 

Radas Comment 2 14 Mar 2010, 11:10 AM

Why do you think that the area at Waitara has young couples moving in? It's because the elderly generally can't afford to pay the strata levies.

Radas Comment 3 14 Mar 2010, 11:10 AM

Decentralization

Is it not better to decentralize along the existing rail infrastructure, improve the commercial facilities at the other stations, and have beautiful apartments like those

in the Kuringai Council area scattered amongst the trees rather than ugly precincts like Waitara.

Kathryn Comment 3.1 18 Mar 2010, 8:40 PM

huh?????? where are the beautiful (new)apartments in the Ku-ring-gai area? I've not seen any.

Radas Comment 3.1.1 18 Mar 2010, 10:08 PM

If you haven't seen them, that shows how well they are hidden behind the tree line.

Compare them to the older style red brick square boxes you see around, or the horrid shopfronts in some suburbs. How could anyone favour those? The new ones have modern materials (which of course can date) mixed with sandstone, interesting designs, landscaped native gardens, and don't look like sardine tins.

Kathryn Comment 3.1.1.1 19 Mar 2010, 2:04 PM

It will be a long time before some of the trees that have been planted will be able to hide the unfortunate looking buildings I've seen spring up all down the Pacific Highway and through St Ives. New is not always good.

Radas Comment 3.1.1.1.1 19 Mar 2010, 8:50 PM

Well at least they will be hidden when the trees grow won't they?

New is not always good, and that's why they've incorporated some elements of 1960's style such as sandstone panelling. There are of course good and bad examples, it only takes Council control to make sure the best elements are repeated in the next generation.

bellinid Comment 3.1.1.2 19 Mar 2010, 3:35 PM

I suspect that Kathryn can actually physically see the new apartments in Ku-ring-gai - it has most probably nothing to do with the trees. It is that she does not consider them beautiful.

Correct me if I am wrong Kathryn!

Kathryn Comment 3.1.1.2.1 21 Mar 2010, 2:50 PM

Wasnt that obvious? :-) It is true...I'm not a fan and never will be!!! I suspect there are many people in Ku-ring-gai who feel the same way.

bellinid Comment 3.1.1.2.1.1 21 Mar 2010, 3:28 PM

Kathryn. You are quite correct. My mother-in-law lives in Ku-ring-gai and she and her friends are all quite distressed and appalled by some of the inappropriate developments that have been built in their Shire.

Radas Comment 3.1.1.2.1.1.1 21 Mar 2010, 6:21 PM

And your alternative solutions that don't affect others are?

bellinid Comment 3.1.1.2.1.1.1.1 22 Mar 2010, 8:57 AM

Your last post makes absolutely no sense. Please expand.

Radas Comment 3.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1 22 Mar 2010, 9:02 PM

I am trying to encourage you to make suggestions as these add most value. Even Kathryn suggested you were restating the obvious and, as you seem to possibly have a background in planning, architecture, local government, or something similar, your suggestions would be quite interesting, even if they differ from ours.

luisalow Comment 3.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1 6 Apr 2010, 1:19 PM

Removed by moderator - the comment contained bad language

matilda2 Comment 3.1.1.2.1.1.2 16 Apr 2010, 9:40 PM

I agree. The vast majority of them are very unattractive!

Radas Comment 4 14 Mar 2010, 11:11 AM

Parking.

The local streets of the Hornsby precinct are already over-parked, and as there are never enough parking spots built under high-rises, it can only get worse. People who drive to the station would in future park - where?

xfactor Comment 4.1 15 Mar 2010, 2:51 PM

Driving and parking around Hornsby Town Centre is terrible. Imagine with all the 20 storey buildings traffic will be so bad that no business wants to invest in the area. Major town centres should be for work, play and entertain.

locale Comment 4.1.1 16 Mar 2010, 5:36 PM

Agreed that the parking and traffic situation in Hornsby Centre is a mess, in particular the bottleneck coming out of Westfield's carpark (Albert St), which is a joke.

Sadly, some of the other areas on this revised plan are headed for the same type of mess.

Consider Waitara.

Anyone who knows the dog leg intersection from Myra to the corner of Palmerston and Edgeworth David will tell you that it cannot handle the current level of traffic from the small shops and school there. Now that corner is to be zoned for 5 storey apartments?

Alexandria parade near Waitara station has similar problems. The recent addition of a green arrow to the traffic lights at Myra has certainly ameliorated them to an extent, but ten storey dwellings along that stretch are going to bring so much more traffic.

I am not anti-development by any means, but I believe the planners need to address community concerns about parking and traffic before they authorize such development.

res12 Comment 4.2 17 Mar 2010, 11:54 AM

I agree that this is going to be one of the biggest problems. I live near the Westfield and the parking is already overloaded in our street every day. Can you imagine what 60,000 sqm of 20 storey high rises and all the residents with their cars will do to our streets and even larger roads. It's a recipe for traffic chaos.

Cat Comment 4.3 29 Mar 2010, 8:43 PM

Ha ha! parking in Hornsby is a joke, what parking?? oh yere I forgot, you could always pay Frank Lowey a fee for parking in Hornsby ;)

luisalow Comment 4.4 6 Apr 2010, 1:16 PM

This is true, however if one lives near Hornsby station and has parking there is no reason why they should be driving 200m to the station, that is very lazy.

The people driving to Hornsby station to park are mostly people who do not live close by, i.e. not in apartments.

Radas Comment 4.4.1 11 Apr 2010, 11:08 PM

Luisa, the point I was hoping to make was that there are never enough parking spaces built under apartment blocks (which is why the streets in the precinct are not empty, even on public holidays when Westfield is closed, and the train station car park is not full). This seems more prevalent in the higher-priced blocks where overseas students share apartments and each have a car.

As for your last comment, it amazes me that some of the people in Linda Street do drive to Westfield (some of them only when it is raining).

crisis Comment 4.4.1.1 13 Apr 2010, 7:56 AM

Maybe they are doing their weekly grocery shopping and so have too much to carry. If so then it is understandable that they would use their car.

Radas Comment 4.4.1.1.1 14 Apr 2010, 7:32 PM

They can purchase one of those two-wheeled trolleys which grandmas used to use (and which my wife has done), which would avoid using both the car and dumping steel four-wheeled specials everywhere.

I know one lady who just does not like to walk anywhere...

Radas Comment 5 14 Mar 2010, 11:12 AM

Commercial.

Currently the auto workshop etc in the area are very handy for commuters, who can drop their cars off before going to work. Removing a bunch of those will restrict availability.

xfactor Comment 5.1 15 Mar 2010, 2:42 PM

There are not many job opportunities in Hornsby other than retail and the odd industry. We need more work opportunities in Hornsby Town Centre not more concrete buildings for housing. Therefore, the precinct around Burdett St, Hunter Lane, Linda St and Hunter St should stay industrial and commercial.

crisis Comment 5.1.1 22 Mar 2010, 3:20 PM

Part of this area is already zoned commercial. Check it out.

Radas Comment 6 14 Mar 2010, 11:14 AM

Walkability to schools.

In the precinct plan Council mentions that the closest school is Hornsby Girls High which is within 1km of the precinct, while at the same time saying the area appears

to be undergoing regeneration as there are young families moving in. Where exactly does that leave the high-school boys and infants/primary kids - walking at least 2km to Waitara?

I can remember when there was a Hornsby Public School not far from Westfield which Council has allowed to be redeveloped as unit blocks.

bellinid Comment 6.1 15 Mar 2010, 1:48 PM

In a way Hornsby Girls High School should be ignored as it is a Selective School, not a local school open to all local students. Comprehensive high schools are somewhat lacking in the area. There are 2 all girls schools - Asquith and Cheltenham, 1 boys school - Asquith and 2 co-ed- Pennant Hills and Carlingford.

Single sex schools are notoriously difficult to get into even if you live within the catchment zone. The co-ed schools are out of area for many residents, and perhaps not that handy to get to anyway for some.

Students from Hornsby, north of Hornsby, Normanhurst and surrounds now have to go to high schools in St Ives and Turramurra, which are not exactly local or easy to get to.

There is a definite need for at least one additional co-ed comprehensive school, perhaps in hornsby near the station.

bellinid Comment 6.2 17 Apr 2010, 11:19 AM

Hornsby Public School was located on the Pacific Highway next door to the Council Chambers. It was closed as a school under a state Liberal government 20 or so years ago. The buildings are now part of Hornsby TAFE. No unit blocks exist on the site.

Radas Comment 7 14 Mar 2010, 11:16 AM

Transport infrastructure.

People catching the train to the city from south of Hornsby during peak hour are faced with the prospect of standing all the way to the city even from Wahroonga on some days. Adding more passengers to the trains at Hornsby will give them no hope of finding a seat. Better to increase the density at Normanhurst, Thornleigh and further down so the new line has its utilization increased. People from Hornsby will not take that line as it is 10 minutes slower than the North Shore line to the city.

Even more suitable is having the high-density development closer to centres of employment, then we don't even need to improve the infrastrucutre.

emma1 Comment 7.1 16 Mar 2010, 10:39 AM

at least you have a train line at hornsby, try carlingford line or where is west pennant hills train line

luisalow Comment 7.1.1 6 Apr 2010, 1:21 PM

I caught the Carlingford train line the other day, very much in need of an update. It was almost a novelty.

crisis Comment 7.2 22 Mar 2010, 3:22 PM

Seeing as how hornsby is to become a more major centre for employment it then does make sense to have more higher density housing in Hornsby itself.

xfactor Comment 7.2.1 22 Mar 2010, 3:55 PM

...then it should be shared equally around the Shire

Radas Comment 7.2.2 22 Mar 2010, 9:07 PM

What makes you think it is best to compress everything in one small area?

Do you not think people would want to live in a less dense area?

Is there a reason why we should take the majority of the people in central Hornsby?

Public transport between suburbs (at least along the train line) is excellent and should pose absolutely no barrier to dispersing the population.

davidmcf Comment 7.2.2.1 25 Mar 2010, 10:52 AM

I'm not sure the public transport is 'excellent'. If you are travelling North of Hornsby, and don't travel in peak time it is appalling. Even in peak periods, I would describe it as adequate. Add a bunch more passengers and this will no longer even be adequate.

Radas Comment 7.2.2.1.1 25 Mar 2010, 10:08 PM

That can easily be fixed by changing the timetable can it not?

davidmcf Comment 7.2.2.1.1.1 6 Apr 2010, 10:50 AM

I'm not sure it is as simple as that. Adding more trains without more tracks is not really that feasible. The infrastructure is not really in place to push more trains (that currently start at Hornsby) to start them at Berowra. Not only that, but those services would be fuller sooner and people further down the line would have trouble getting on a train at all.

As it is, the North Shore line only has a handful of places where an 'express' train can pass a 'all stops' (Hornsby, Gordon, Lindfield??). In essence trains arrive at the city in the order they leave Hornsby, and adding extra services in peak times is not really feasible.

Radas Comment 7.2.2.1.1.1.1 14 Apr 2010, 7:39 PM

Then the interurbans which come down the line from Gosford could be changed to stopping at all stations from Berowra couldn't they?

I think in the morning at least, that most of those interurbans do stop at Berowra and Asquith (so why is Hornsby so much better?) and adding a few more stops would only add a few minutes to each journey from the central coast (and if they have to sit behind all-stations trains from Berowra anyway, who is going to lose out (unless there are overtaking lanes north of Hornsby)?

Also people getting on at Mt COlah for example vs getting on at Hornsby won't make any difference to people anywhere from Waitara onwards.

davidmcf Comment 7.2.2.1.1.2 6 Apr 2010, 11:00 AM

Just to add - I'm not against all development north of Hornsby, but I hardly think 10 storeys in Asquith is any more pleasant than 20 storeys in Hornsby. If you look at the whole development plan, Asquith is planned to carry a rather excessive amount of the new developments planned.

luisalow Comment 7.2.2.2 6 Apr 2010, 1:22 PM

There are some good areas around Hornsby where there is very little medium or high density housing, i.e. Hornsby Heights, Asquith. It's just a question of things there being well built.

Radas Comment 8 14 Mar 2010, 11:18 AM

Previous plan

As there has been such a radical change from the previous release of the housing strategy, are we to believe that the consultants who provided that version were incompetent?

Did Council waste most of the money spent on that version?

matilda2 Comment 8.1 1 Apr 2010, 9:23 PM

There are several phases to this strategy. I think this is phase 2 and "waitara" was phase 1. I dont suppose anyone knows whether the Linda St rezonings were brought foward from the next (3rd) phase of the strategy?

Kevin07 Comment 8.1.1 6 Apr 2010, 9:22 AM

Apparently for the next official phase there is a large allotment of land held by 1 owner out Dural way that is going to be used. However, for the current phase it was stipulated that precincts needed to be within reasonable access to existing transport.

The next phase at Dural (if it eventuates) will have it's own issues with transport using Boundary Rd as the main link to get over to Pennant Hills Rd. Both of these roads are carparks in the morning peak now so adding more traffic to that section of the road network will not be a good result at all.

Radas Comment 9 14 Mar 2010, 11:19 AM

Is council happy to sway with the wind based on Not-In-My-Backyard opinions which bombarded Council with "build in Beecroft", "build in Hornsby" demands? The experts had dismissed those after careful analysis yet now they are the prime targets of increased yield.

Does that sound like a complete back-flip to you, or that Council has no idea about what it is making decisions on (or both)?

bellinid Comment 9.1 15 Mar 2010, 1:57 PM

How do you know that these areas had been subject to "careful analysis" by the so called experts?

Do you know something many others don't?

Is it perhaps possible that the re-analysis was perhaps more careful than the first?

To call the revised stategy a complete back-flip is rather an exaggeration. A complete back flip would have meant that the strategy had completely changed and all new areas chosen etc etc.

Stop exaggerating and stop insulting all those people who made valid comments about the original Strategy.

Radas Comment 9.1.1 15 Mar 2010, 7:05 PM

I would reply by saying I didn't see any comments by Council saying the authors of the last report had been found to be lacking, or their analysis had. Why do you consider the new strategy has made better choices?

I consider it a backflip to completely remove some precincts (the ones with most comments last time around) and replace them with different ones, don't you? One problem is that the people least able to comment (poor, lees educated or elderly) don't have as strong a voice.

As for insulting people, I don't believe a single one should feel insulted. After all more…

 

bellinid Comment 9.1.1.1 17 Mar 2010, 8:49 AM

Perhaps you too are suffering from "not in my backyard" syndrome?

res12 Comment 9.1.1.1.1 17 Mar 2010, 12:18 PM

I understand what you're saying - as a Hornsby resident I am certainly against the proposed strategy as it stands. Because it seems like the strategy is forcing this into just a few people's backyards. I'd be happy if they spread this around the WHOLE shire - not just unfairly target a few areas where the council thinks there'll be least resistance to the plan. Like increasing townhouse or unit block heights across the WHOLE shire, not simply look for a quick fix and dump a bunch of 20 storey high rises in Hornsby, Waitara, Carlingford.

Radas Comment 9.1.1.1.2 17 Mar 2010, 7:25 PM

Bellinid, you have just shown that you do not read others' comments carefully before chipping in, as I stated :

"Those who have commented previously are simply trying to tip the balance the other way and (because their areas were slated for corruption first) cast the first stone. Who can blame them? Not me, I am doing the same. "

bellinid Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1 18 Mar 2010, 8:43 AM

Sorry to disagree with what you just said but I believe I did read other comments carefully. You clearly dismissed the validity of people's comments about the original strategy as being simply "not in my backyard". This clearly implies that these people had little of true value to say because they were totally swayed by self interest. Sometimes their comments may only have been about self interest but sometimes they may have been very valid. This total dismissing of yours is not very helpful to the process.

From many of you comments you sound like you may be affected by the revised Strategy and are not happy about it, hence my last comment. If you are affected, it is fair enough for you to be concerned.

res12 Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1.1 18 Mar 2010, 12:05 PM

I think all our comments have elements of self-interest as well as looking at the issues more broadly and objectively, from a whole-of-Shire perspective. I guess we wouldn't be on this Forum otherwise! Bellinid do you support the revised strategy (sorry if you've said this elsewhere and I haven't seen it)? I'd be interested to know what residents in other suburbs think about 20 storeys in Hornsby? If Berowra residents were unhappy with 5 storeys near them, surely they must have sympathy for 4 times that being proposed in Hornsby?

bellinid Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1.1.1 18 Mar 2010, 5:52 PM

I haven't said anything about whether I support it or not. I do know that according to the State Govt's Metropolitan Strategy/North Subregional Strategy, Hornsby, as the subregion's major centre is meant to grow into a much larger centre.

It will be the focus of economic development for the area. so that means that there will be more commercial, retail, govt offices, entertainment etc etc. And this will in all probability mean more high rise. I daresay that George St will change significantly because of this. It is already changing. Maybe some of these future buildings may well be 20 storeys also, much like in Chatswood.

The Department of Planning announced this week that there is a review of their Metro Strategy at the moment. I haven't seen it but it would be worth having a look. Every single one of us is potentially affected.

res12 Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1 18 Mar 2010, 6:40 PM

Yeah - there's lots of other plans/strategies that fit into this whole picture. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to follow a nice straight path, i.e. upgrading of current, and building new, public transport lines before the building of new residential sites, etc. I have most sympathy for those in the north west who will have to wait possibly a decade before they see a train line out there.

bellinid Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1 18 Mar 2010, 8:15 PM

A decade is probably optimistic! If new rail lines went in, it would benefit us too in established areas because the new areas around new stations and the vicinity can be desinged with higher density housing, town centres etc and in ways that are not detrimental. This is one of the things that everyone should be pushing for - more transport links particularly rail and metro. This instead of just bickering over which local suburb should or should not get higher density housing.

emma1 Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1 18 Mar 2010, 10:54 PM

I agree the sooner the NWM goes ahead we will all benefit. My concerns are that the state government in 6 months may decide not to go ahead with it. This is the case of the Parramatta to Epping rail link.

According to Councils plans the Parramatta to Epping link is still listed as going ahead. Council is using this as one reason to push for Carlingford precinct (a ghost train to Epping).

Yes we all do need to work together for a resonable outcome.

The developments should be spread across the council, not limited in particular precincts.

bellinid Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1 19 Mar 2010, 3:43 PM

Correct me if I am wrong but I don't think that according to council the Epping to Parramatta link is going ahead. This link was killed off years ago and has not been formally revived. Many, myself included wish it would be revived. Perhaps council mentioned it as a desirable thing?

As for developments being spread across the entire council area, not limited to particular precincts, I find it amusing and hypocritical that so many of the people now jumping up and down about this remained very quiet during the earlier forum. Is this because they were not affected then?????????

Radas Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1 19 Mar 2010, 8:57 PM

I would say the people in the centre of Hornsby thought they already had high density and so have always been taking the brunt of the compression and that it was the turn of others. Its a shame to see people in some suburbs with next to no development trying to push everything into other areas which are already high density, and not give a stuff about the people who live there - aren't we supposed to be a fair country? Do we not want to share burdens?

crisis Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1 22 Mar 2010, 3:32 PM

Hornsby is a fairly large suburb. There are still quite a number of areas like where Hornsby West Public School is, Manor Rd, down william St that have no high density and are not at all affected by high density and probably will not be affected by high density. The centre of hornsby is another matter. It has had higher densities for quite some time, beginning with units built in the 60's through to the higher storeys of the last 10 or so years.

So the people who live in the centre of Hornsby live in high density housing but don't want anymore high density housing around them.

Did I get this right? If so, I don't understand why, if they hate high density so much they are living in it quite happily.

And if they do like it, what is the problem with having more? A loss of views?

xfactor Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1 22 Mar 2010, 3:52 PM

crisis... Read all the other comments who oppose

We oppose it because what Council is proposing is over-development not sensible development. Too high, too close and too many...

At the moment the 3 storey walk-ups are well hidden amongst trees, 20 storeys can't, therefore does not suit the character of the Bushland Shire surroundings.

Radas Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.2 22 Mar 2010, 9:24 PM

crises - as xfactor said - did you read the other comments? Why should we lose our homes because you think we should?

It goes something like this:

1) One greedy person sells their business, or greedy group of people sell their apartments, for above market prices

2) The developer now has a foothold to manipulate others with

3) The developer builds a 20-story apartment close next door to your place

4) You become depressed looking at a 20 storey building in your face

5) You see neighbours also become depressed and slowly sell off their apartments one-by-one.

6) You finally sell your place for below more…

 

res12 Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.3 23 Mar 2010, 8:18 AM

Hi crisis - I don't believe that people in Hornsby are happy with their high density constructions. In the initial Housing Strategy the council sought feedback from residents in these types of dwellings around the Shire to inform the types of housing forms they would include in this new Strategy. Hornsby residents (i.e. in College Cresecent, Ashley St, Pound Rd) had the lowest satisfaction rates of all the Shire in terms of things like: all elements of building height, ratio of development to site area, amount of private open space, the use of front setbacks, adequate building separation, the level more…

 

Radas Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.2 19 Mar 2010, 11:51 PM

You might enjoy this old relic - look at those beautiful graphics (Oops it was created in 2006)!

http://www.hornsby.nsw.gov.au/uploads/documents/Hornsbyflyer.pdf

bellinid Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.1 20 Mar 2010, 9:41 AM

Yes I've seen this. What about it? They are potential sites for future development of Hornsby.

emma1 Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.3 22 Mar 2010, 1:55 PM

If yo read the submissions it till lists Epping to Parramatta to going ahead and NW railway not going ahead, so how up to date is the information council is relying on.

res12 Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.3.1 23 Mar 2010, 9:08 AM

There doesn't appear to be any current modelling or new data presented to justify this revised strategy. I realise modelling is about extrapolating to the future - but this revised strategy contains many and varied changes from the previous one - the conditions are different - in particular this inclusion of 20 storey units which was proposed nowhere in the previous strategy. Surely a change such as this warrants revised modelling on a range of factors - isn't this type of data what planning should be based upon?

matilda2 Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.3.1.1 1 Apr 2010, 9:28 PM

As I mentioned above somewhere...perhaps the Linda St precincts were moved foward from the 3rd phase of the housing strategy. I believe Hornsby Shire is in phase 2 of the rezonings.

res12 Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.4 23 Mar 2010, 9:23 AM

Re: bellinid's comment about people now jumping up and down but remaining quiet during the earlier forum ... speaking for myself I didn't live in Hornsby then, although I did end up looking at the initial strategy after the feedback for it was closed. Given the extensive changes in the revised strategy, I don't believe it's hypocritical that people are now more vocal - particularly as many suburbs and residents are now being saddled with higher density housing and far greater dwelling yields than were proposed in the previous strategy.

In my opinion, the initial strategy was better conceived, so I wouldn't have felt the need to give any specific feedback then. But given the only reason council appears to have made these changes in the revised strategy is because of strong feedback from residents in Berowra and Normanhurst in the initial round - I find it hypocritical that any residents from these areas or anywhere else would now suggest that people who didn't have a problem with the first strategy should now just keep quiet on the second.

emma1 Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.4.1 28 Mar 2010, 8:07 PM

Part of the problem is the way Hornsby council has notified people regarding the housing strategy. For example if you are affected by the proposed rezoning you receive a letter or if you live within 500 metres. If not, you are not actually notifed.

Perhaps there should have been across the council area mail out on the rezoning.

probbin Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.4.1.1 29 Mar 2010, 2:38 PM

Actually we didn't get any letter until 24 April - are they trying to hide something. Also more people with non-english asa first language, who know little about government process live in Hornsby Linda Street, so the council is hoping to push this through knowing they have no idea they should respond

Radas Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.4.1.1.1 29 Mar 2010, 11:19 PM

Actually probbin, two apartments next door to mine are owned by Chinese and they have asked me to help them write letters of complaint to Council. I will try to find out if there are any others like this in my building, and you should all do the same.

Council should take into account the fact that a higher proportion of (very friendly once you get to know them, Clem) people who don't speak English as a first language live here in Linda Street precinct and nearby than somewhere like Normanhurst or Berowra, and adjust their consultation process accordingly, otherwise they could be accused of being discriminatory.

matilda2 Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.4.2 1 Apr 2010, 9:30 PM

Who is suggesting that? you are entitled to defend your homes.

crisis Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.4.2.1 1 Apr 2010, 9:51 PM

I agree with matilda2. What is being said by Radas and probbin is disturbingly paranoid. It is well known that there are many NESB residents living in Normanhurst. Perhaps Hornsby is a stepping stone for some recent arrivals before they purchase a home, perhaps in Normanhurst, perhaps elsewhere. I believe that there is quite a significant number of rented apartments in Hornsby and Waitara. Therefore less owner/occupiers and more investment properties, compared to other areas.

Radas Comment 9.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.4.2.1.1 4 Apr 2010, 7:56 AM

It is not paranoid, it is fact - read the Community Atlas on Council's website and check the percentage of people from a non-English speaking background - the type of people who ar most likely not to be familiar with British-based legal and government systems. And then check the people not confident in English.

emma1 Comment 10 16 Mar 2010, 10:37 AM

not in my back yard isn't good enough or maybe not at all in Hornsby council

share it equally between all precincts in the council if it must happen.

res12 Comment 10.1 17 Mar 2010, 11:51 AM

Well said - sharing it equally is what's going to need to happen in the long term anyway as the population keeps growing. Destroying one suburb like Hornsby with 20 storey concrete jungles (although they're doing their best in Waitara too) is a short-term fix to meet their dwelling targets. Spread out the development and keep it low-rise - 5 storeys, maybe 8-10 at most. NOT 20!

xfactor Comment 10.1.1 17 Mar 2010, 12:13 PM

Totally agree... bring back the original Housing Strategy and spread the load for the good of the Shire. Inevitably, State Government will force Normanhurst and Berowra to share the load one day. Maybe 3 storeys for Normanhurst and Berowra instead of 5 storeys.

nexus Comment 10.1.1.1 17 Mar 2010, 12:19 PM

Waitara faces similar issues as Normanhurst and Berowra (such as traffic, open space etc), yet the original proposal for an additional 400 odd dwellings remains intact. I agree that other suburbs should share the load. I thought that part of the strategy was to provide different housing types in suburbs. I can't see how this is being acheived by loading up Hornsby and Waitara.

res12 Comment 10.1.1.1.1 17 Mar 2010, 12:45 PM

Absolutely - it should be a mix of low- mid- and a very small amount of high-rise developments (like College Cr and George St in Hornsby - along main roads/train lines so they're not destroying the town centre). If you read the report on submissions for the last round, ALL (I repeat ALL) the form letters submitted by Berowra residents nominate that ALL the multi-unit housing be provided within Hornsby. Instead of the council using collective common sense and realising that that is ridiculous, it appears they've bowed to that pressure. So much for representing the interests of the whole SHIRE.

matilda2 Comment 10.1.1.1.1.1 1 Apr 2010, 9:32 PM

Count your lucky stars they are not suggesting the department of housing build 63 units for the homeless people next to you like they are in college cresent. Now thats asking for social problems!

crisis Comment 10.1.1.1.1.1.1 1 Apr 2010, 9:59 PM

Well actually there is a dire need for this type of accommodation and it is likely that there will be more. Hornsby is a major centre so it is better able to provide this sort of accommodation because it has all the ancillary support services to help people in need. Somewhere like Berowra would not be anywhere near as effective for this type of thing.

probbin Comment 10.1.1.1.1.1.1.1 16 Apr 2010, 5:40 PM

What exactly are all those ancilliary support services you mention?

xfactor Comment 11 16 Mar 2010, 11:46 AM

This is clearly over-development not sensible development to Hornsby Town Centre. It seems Council just dream this on the run, completely different to the original Housing Strategy from last year with no consultation with affected residents in advance before the amendment was released. And still not many residents know of this development after release. Council just wants to hide this and hope to pass it quietly.

If Council is serious about renewal, it should be shared across the Shire. Hornsby Shire have lots more land than any area of Sydney.

Sensible development should be more sustainable environmentally friendlier 3 to 7 storeys like Meadowbank, Rhodes, Homebush Bay.

Radas Comment 11.1 16 Mar 2010, 7:46 PM

I think Council is going to send out letters to all those in or near proposed affected areas, but you might wonder why they can't synchronize the mail out with the release of the documents - it means that effectively the display period is shortened.

res12 Comment 11.2 17 Mar 2010, 12:01 PM

Completely agree re: council just wanting to hide this and pass it through quickly. I wouldn't have known except I got a letter because I live in the Linda St precinct. They probably think we're all renters and won't care/bother with a submission. That's why I'm doing a letter box drop outside of the affected precincts around Hornsby so more residents are aware of what the council wants to do. I think this forum is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of the outrage that residents in Hornsby feel about this 'strategy'.

Radas Comment 11.2.1 17 Mar 2010, 7:30 PM

Lucky you got a letter, I'm in the precinct and haven't received one yet.

In addition two of my neighbours registered for Bangthetable two days ago - one never received the confirmation email, the other received one but the link did not work. Were you registered form last time (like me) or were you able to register since Sunday?

Proud of you doing a letterbox drop!

res12 Comment 11.2.1.1 17 Mar 2010, 7:42 PM

Ha ha! Thanks! Still got to get the brochures printed and will probably do it on Monday. So your neighbours should get one soon - even if they can't get on this site! I registered for this site today and it worked fine. Got an email straight away and was logged in. That's really poor form that you haven't received a letter from the council yet. I got mine on Monday. I wonder how many other people in the precinct haven't ...

matilda2 Comment 11.2.2 1 Apr 2010, 9:34 PM

It happened last time around too.

xfactor Comment 12 16 Mar 2010, 11:54 AM

Stand up and show your anger towards Hornsby Shire Council and NSW State Government here and by writing and emailing to them ASAP.

res12 Comment 12.1 17 Mar 2010, 11:48 AM

Totally agree - our councillors, particularly, are there to represent the interests of the WHOLE Shire, not just a few pockets with the loudest voices. I have no idea how they thought it was appropriate to let just a few areas shoulder basically all the load for new housing stock. Get your submissions in! We have until the 23 April!

xfactor Comment 13 16 Mar 2010, 1:24 PM

If 3 to 5 storeys can't replace/built next to 1 or 2 story houses in Normanhurst and Berowra how can it be fair for Hornsby building 20 storey towers to replace/built next to 3 storey blocks? As Council said in their Strategy the town centre will not cope with existing drainage and sewerage and they don't even have money to replace it. The money from their proposed Infrastructure Levy won't cover it either.

Radas Comment 13.1 16 Mar 2010, 7:53 PM

I would suggest people with a view are more affected than those who only essentially look across the road, and those in houses are on average less affected because they are more likely to be able to see out other sides of the house (whereas units typically look only in one direction).

I sit looking out across Hunter Street to the Meriton apartment block and, while it takes us a portion of my view, it is set well back. It was quite well placed. It won't be the under the proposal, they instead want Hornsby to look like Hong Kong or Singapore, where you peer between blocks and may catch a glimpse of the outside world.

xfactor Comment 14 17 Mar 2010, 10:12 AM

Hornsby Town Centre just can't cope with any more high-rises and more than double the current height allows.

Just look at businesses around the area...Council can't even approve lunch trading for a restaurant at Burdett St Meriton Apartment due to lack of parking and traffic. Guess what the restaurant closed just after 6 months.

This is extremely bad for local businesses and residents.

res12 Comment 15 17 Mar 2010, 11:45 AM

I am totally outraged that 'our' council is unfairly targeting Hornsby for more high density housing (we already have it along George St and College Crescent). No other suburb is earmarked for 20 storeys - 10 storeys at most. As has been mentioned on here, the areas that gave the strongest feedback in the last round (i.e. Berowra, Normanhurst) have had nearly all their precincts removed from the current plan.

I've emailed all councillors about my disgust at this 'strategy' and am doing up a pamphlet to letter box drop to as many residents in this suburb as possible to encourage them to put forward a submission through the formal channels. Otherwise our outrage means nothing if it doesn't get heard loud and clear.

If the council's going to pander to the loudest voices rather than demonstrate good planning principles, then as Hornsby residents we need to get loud. Does anyone know how to go about distributing form letters/petitions (i.e. standard letters people can sign and post to increase Hornsby's submissions rate)? These were used a lot in the last feedback round from other suburbs. Are there local associations we can work through?

xfactor Comment 15.1 17 Mar 2010, 12:06 PM

Great idea... we should have peaceful protest marches to Hornsby Council as well and petitions to be handed out and sign around Westfield.

res12 Comment 15.1.1 17 Mar 2010, 12:14 PM

Fantastic idea! I was going to write to the local paper too and get them to do something on it. But if even a few of us from this Forum organised something I know we'd get a lot of support from residents. I just think a lot of people aren't aware of this.

Radas Comment 16 17 Mar 2010, 10:20 PM

Sham planning logic exposed.

According to the Report on Submissions from the last round:

Form Letters - top six reasons residents objected to the strategy applying to their locality were:

1. Open Space

2. Traffic

3. Character/streetscape

4. Local Services

5. Bushfire

6. Loss of trees/biodiversity

Items 1 to 4 also apply to Linda Street precinct, and even more than in the precincts which were complaining. For example, what traffic would 10 apartments generate compared to 100, or 50 compared to 500?

Item 5 is invalid as building apartments will reduce bushfire risk since timber houses and established gardens

with much undergrowth will be removed. How much longer does it more…

 

res12 Comment 16.1 18 Mar 2010, 12:20 PM

Wow - that's a lot of work you put in to put that together. I really think these are the sorts of things we need to be letting our councillors know. Give them the facts about why we disagree, so they can't just say it's based on emotion.

I found an article from the last feedback round where Barry O'Farrell and Judy Hopwood (our State MP) stated they thought the strategy should be scrapped. I'm going to write to them to let them know the revised version is out and it is worse (in my opinion). The article is here -> http://hornsby-advocate.whereilive.com.au/news/story/o-farrell-calls-for-housing-strategy-to-be-withdrawn/

res12 Comment 17 18 Mar 2010, 6:32 PM

So I've done a bit more research today comparing the initial and revised strategies. I've realised that in terms of writing to our elected representatives, specific questions are best if you want answers! So I've emailed our mayor and councillors with the following questions. I'll post any responses up here. I'd be interested to know your thoughts ... (it’s split over a couple of posts because of length)

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

I wrote to you all earlier this week to voice my concerns regarding the proposed Linda St precinct as part of the revised Hornsby Shire Housing Strategy.

After more research, more…

 

res12 Comment 17.1 18 Mar 2010, 6:33 PM

4. Context: In the initial 2009 Housing Strategy, the Housing Strategy Steering Committee identified 5 storey housing as the preferred form of multi-unit housing for the majority of the identified precincts. In particular, because “it is smaller scale than the 8-10 storey form currently facilitated by Council’s planning controls”.

My question/s: How did a clear preference for 5 storey housing forms in the initial 2009 strategy become a mandate for 20 storey housing forms in the revised 2010 strategy? What reasoning can the council/Steering Committee provide for this extreme turnaround?

5. Context: The initial 2009 strategy consisted of only four forms more…

 

res12 Comment 17.1.1 18 Mar 2010, 6:33 PM

7. The context: The Urban Design consultancy analysis provided for the initial 2009 strategy confirmed that the recommended height and form for each precinct was appropriate, from an urban design perspective in the context of the precinct (i.e. no more than 8-10 storeys) and recommended amendments were provided where relevant.

My question/s: Given that this consultancy did not appear to even suggest that 20 storey developments were appropriate in the initial 2009 strategy, why is this same consultancy now providing built form documents for the revised 2010 strategy stating that 20 storey developments are now appropriate?

8. Context: Under the State more…

 

Radas Comment 17.1.1.1 18 Mar 2010, 10:25 PM

Marvellous! I will have to incorporate some of your ideas in my thinking - and my letters. Let me find something else as well ;-)

Radas Comment 17.1.1.2 18 Mar 2010, 11:06 PM

We can probably find some additional ideas by reviewing reasons Council has rejected development applications in the past.

locale Comment 17.1.1.3 19 Mar 2010, 11:58 AM

Great work res12, thanks for giving a damn.

We look forward to the replies you receive from council.

Radas Comment 18 19 Mar 2010, 9:13 PM

Council should prepare to pull down the unprofitable businesses in Hunter Street and build electric vehicle charging stations. These will be needed because:

1) Apartment dwellers will have no place to charge their electric vehicles, and can charge them at night in these places.

2) People from surrounding areas who drive their electric cars to the station for the commute will be able to leave their cars charging during the day

3) People visiting Westfield on weekends can charge their cars while shopping.

4) Council can make a profit from running such stations.

5) Electric cars are going to hit in a big way soon.

Building apartment blocks in Hunter St will make this type of thing impossible in future, and generally the amenities in Hornsby are poor anyway.

Pack Comment 18.1 20 Mar 2010, 4:30 PM

The council will be requiring all buildings to have charging points for each parking position. They will probably need standard 10 Kilo watt stations. The ASA has not yet adopted the plug/socket standard.

In the long run the whole exercise will probably be redundant.

It will soon become obvious even to politicians that Sydney cannot support 6 or 7 million people. Soon it will become an election issue and if the present high immigration rate is dropped then the whole plan becomes meaningless.

I cannot see the first building getting started before 2013.

So you have both state and federal elections by then.

probbin Comment 18.1.1 23 Mar 2010, 1:51 PM

There is a chance that election will change nothing, and that govts still believe Sydney can support so many, so you should not be convinced not to comment by the above argument.

I cannot learn the motive for Pack making such comment, it may be innocent and try to cheer me up, but it could also be trying to lull me into a false sense of security so I do not protest

Radas Comment 19 19 Mar 2010, 9:25 PM

The playground at Willow Park, corner of Edgeworth David Avenue and Sherbrook Road is usually far too crowded as a result of their being too many residents in 8-storey Waitara precinct over the road. Now Council want to make the same thing happen in the limited parks near Linda Street precinct.

This is a bad idea and will reduce the quality of life for all nearby residents.

res12 Comment 19.1 23 Mar 2010, 8:21 AM

And the council's own documents state that young families are one of the largest demographic groups coming into Hornsby. Loss of green/open space and lack of provision for new parks (i.e. general, sporting) will be a big hit to these families (as well as other residents generally). I thought I read somewhere that there is already not enough space for new recreational facilities to be built - 20 storey unit blocks x 60,000sqm will only exacerbate this.

Cat Comment 19.2 4 Apr 2010, 1:21 PM

When I was a child playing at Willow Park I thought it was the big play ground haha. Your post just game me memories :)

Lindsay Comment 20 22 Mar 2010, 11:47 AM

Like it or not there is going to be intensified development around existing railway stations.

What is essential is that the rezoning process for each site be accompanied by a MASTERPLAN and DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN which address how the developments will be coordinated in terms of appearance (Stories/setbacks colors etc) Public services and facilities (road improvements, intersections, roundabouts,footpaths cycleways Pedestrian overpasses (ie over the highway and rail line at Asquith), parks and playgrounds.

The Developer Contributions Plan will define how these are to be funded (Council can charge $20,000 per dwelling without State Govt approval and more if it gets approval this more…

 

xfactor Comment 20.1 22 Mar 2010, 12:07 PM

Exactly that's why we need to share around the Shire not just packed into a couple of suburbs. If we share then we will not have to build as high. There are plenty of suburbs along rail lines in the Shire.

res12 Comment 20.2 23 Mar 2010, 8:30 AM

I agree Lindsay about the need for master planning. My biggest concern with this revised Housing Strategy is that it's just a plan seemingly sitting out on its own without any clear evidence or justification from the council on why in their revised plan they are increasing housing density in some suburbs and not others, where the modelling is (economic, transport, etc) to estimate the impacts of their proposals on immediate and surrounding suburbs and what the plan is to improve existing infrastructure (roads, trains) that is clearly going to be under immense strain if the re-zoning and subsequent development goes ahead. All of this detail appears to be lacking in the revised Strategy and I believe the council should be making it public - assuming they've done any of this research.

xfactor Comment 21 22 Mar 2010, 2:20 PM

According to the State Government's Metropolitan Transport Plan, no additional transport/infrastructure will be planned for Hornsby for the next 20 to 30 years...that's another reason why 20 storey buildings should not be allowed to go ahead with no increase in transport and infrastructure.

We need more community facilities such as parks, open space, community centres, civic place, entertainment centre etc...not more giant concrete buildings.

res12 Comment 21.1 23 Mar 2010, 8:36 AM

I think it's this type of detail xfactor that we need to be raising with the council. I'm not entirely across how this whole planning process is meant to occur, but it seems to be occurring along the lines of 'let's just whack these dwellings in somewhere because we need to reach a target and the rest will fall into place'. Surely in the process of developing this Strategy the council needs to explicitly be stating how things like transport and other infrastructure will be improved/built to service the massive number of new dwellings they're proposing in the Shire? If they've put that sort of detail anywhere for this new Strategy I haven't seen it. I could only see old traffic modelling in the previous strategy which seemed to say there wasn't a problem. Perhaps some of these consultants actually need to try and drive on some of our roads in peak time or try and get a seat on a train ...

Kevin07 Comment 21.1.1 23 Mar 2010, 3:31 PM

I've seen and spoken to a car counting Contractor in Mount Colah just before the release of v2.0 of the strategy. I inquired to the reason for counting cars. Yep, you guessed it, to obtain updated traffic volumes for the re-zoning proposals.

Kathryn Comment 21.1.1.1 23 Mar 2010, 4:15 PM

Was the data taken in school holidays? :-)

bellinid Comment 21.1.1.1.1 23 Mar 2010, 4:19 PM

That is a possibility. They did that last year.

Kevin07 Comment 21.1.1.1.2 25 Mar 2010, 12:31 PM

No it was not School hols when they were counting. They did a count in the am peak and returned to the same spot and conducted a pm peak count.

res12 Comment 21.1.1.2 23 Mar 2010, 5:11 PM

So if they've got updated traffic data shouldn't this be released to the public to look at? I thought the point of public consultation would be to put all the information out there for people to understand why they're making the decisions they're making?

bellinid Comment 21.1.1.2.1 23 Mar 2010, 7:16 PM

I think what Kathryn was alluding to was the fact that traffic counts done during school holidays are not a true indicator of the volume of traffic in the area as people are not dropping off children and may also be away on holidays.

probbin Comment 21.1.1.2.1.1 29 Mar 2010, 2:36 PM

Removed by moderator - the comment failed to respect other users

res12 Comment 22 25 Mar 2010, 10:14 AM

I notice Barry O'Farrell's launched his five point plan to mark 1 year til the next State Election (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw-act/its-time-to-roll-out-the-barrell-as-ofarrell-launches-bid-to-become-our-next-premier/story-e6freuzi-1225844975434).

One of the points - 'to give planning powers back to the community'.

I haven't read any further on it - any thoughts on what this means exactly?

Rooney Comment 22.1 25 Mar 2010, 11:23 AM

Are we not exercising planning in the community at the moment with this blog? I want to know of the current lot planning the place and where they live if not in a community. He makes it sound like anyone can do it. I'd like to see any Barry or Jo Average deal with the complexities involved in planning, he could start with something simple, like Redfern. OR, lets keep it local, the quarry.

probbin Comment 22.1.1 25 Mar 2010, 5:30 PM

I would like to know where the planners all live too - specifically are they in the Shire, and if not, have they ever been subject to highrise being built next to their place?

bellinid Comment 22.1.1.1 25 Mar 2010, 10:14 PM

Well planners being human beings have to live somewhere don't they? No doubt they live in all sorts of areas - inner city areas, on acreage, in suburbia, in houses, apartments, townhouses, just like everyone else.

Radas Comment 22.1.1.1.1 26 Mar 2010, 8:59 PM

And your point is?

bellinid Comment 22.1.1.1.1.1 26 Mar 2010, 9:49 PM

Whose point? Probbins or mine?

probbin Comment 22.1.1.1.1.1.1 29 Mar 2010, 2:35 PM

Removed by moderator - the comment failed to respect other users

Radas Comment 22.1.1.1.1.1.2 29 Mar 2010, 11:22 PM

Yours bellinid, where planners live has a strong bearing on how they treat others. If they live in similar circumstances they are more likely to show empathy for those affected and think of alternatives, don't you agree?

luisalow Comment 22.1.1.1.1.1.2.1 6 Apr 2010, 1:27 PM

Yes and no, some planners don't really have any idea. I personally don't think many town planners are particularly equipped - I know many people having studied it and they are mostly clueless.

matilda2 Comment 22.2 1 Apr 2010, 9:42 PM

Oh goodie...I've been hoping someone would ask this question. Please see my post in the 20 storey section with todays date.

xfactor Comment 23 25 Mar 2010, 10:15 AM

Currently there are too many trolleys dumped by nearby residents shopping at Westfield. Imagine what will happen after the 20 storey towers are built, it will be thousand times worse endangering the lives of pedestrians and vehicles not to mention an eyesore.

bellinid Comment 23.1 25 Mar 2010, 10:17 PM

Vehicles are not alive, so their lives are not in danger.

Seriously though, do you really think that trolley dumping is going to be even a minor criteria in any decision making about changing densities?

And yes I agree that trolleys are a problem in many areas

Cat Comment 23.2 29 Mar 2010, 8:35 PM

I'm glad you noticed, I have to remove approx 3 trolleys a week from my front lawn (they're such an eyesore when dumped), 3 years ago I was lucky to remove 1 a month!

Also I'm beginning to notice illegal dumping of rubbish next to park bins.

crisis Comment 23.2.1 29 Mar 2010, 8:49 PM

Well you are lucky that you have only just noticed illegal dumping. It has been happening for years in other areas, mine included. Shopping trolleys need to be controlled by the shopping centre. Complain to them

Lindsay Comment 24 26 Mar 2010, 11:12 AM

Assuming that Council press ahead with this process (Just on example of why it should take a step back is the fact that ten stories in ASQUITH is an absolutely out of character planning disaster which would sign the political demise of the ward Councillors and Mayor in the eyes of that community alone) The rezoning process has to be completed by early July this year (see letter from Sam Haddad).

..thats only 3 and a bit months away...this means applications will be able to be made and approved from then on...To make sure that development is coordinated and services provided more…

 

Radas Comment 25 27 Mar 2010, 10:17 AM

Flaw in planning.

Look at Hong Kong - a province constrained by geography which has high density (similar to Hornsby Shire in some ways, if we are to have high density areas). The government there does not try to cram residential areas in the middle of proposed commercial centres. It knows that it is important to group similar businesses together (offices, high tech parks, light industrial) as it helps them work with each other, to build critical mass of customers, and allows building of suitable services.

Singapore is similar - highrise all along transport routes and commercial grouped together.

They both know all more…

 

bellinid Comment 25.1 27 Mar 2010, 11:08 AM

Have you not heard of dormitory suburbs? And dead lifeless and dangerous commercial and retail areas after close of business?

Mixed use brings life and vitality to an area.

xfactor Comment 25.1.1 28 Mar 2010, 12:02 PM

Yes, I've heard, you mean Normanhurst, north of Hornsby and Berowra that's why they closed and sold Berowra Police Station, they's why no learn to swim pool for Berowra. Because they are against any development, authorities got their message and start withdrawing cancelling community projects and facilities because they don't want to renew and improve their own community. That's why the new Infrastructure Levy will all be spent for Hornsby and no where else. Supply equals demand.

xfactor Comment 25.1.2 28 Mar 2010, 12:08 PM

If you want Hornsby to be like Chatswood, then where are we going to put commerical buildings after putting in all these ugly residential buildings? Mix use is hardly enough for commercial if you compare to other major centres. At the moment there are hardly any compare to Chatswood. In future all these new residents will have to clogg the transport and roads network cause there will not be enough jobs available. I thought we want to live, work and play in one location this Housing Strategy won't.

Radas Comment 25.1.3 29 Mar 2010, 11:31 PM

Based on your comments bellinid I would be expecting Westfield to be a hotbed of crime! Do you really expect one or two blocks of office buildings will add much more danger? And that they are not better places to do business, so attract more businesses?

And adding 20 storey apartment blocks with a concentration of (relatively) wealthy residents at night, will not add to crime? Where underground parking full of newer model cars, where you only need to follow someone in the gate to get access to all of them will not? And where you can follow people up in lifts to get onto residential floors and thus get your hands on lots of electronics, will not?

crisis Comment 25.1.3.1 30 Mar 2010, 9:15 AM

I am a bit confused here. If concentrations of apartments leads to crime then why are you living already in a high density area? And also if high rise apartments are such crime areas by your reasoning it is ok for them to happen in other areas! I don't think that is what the other comment was about actually

azroc Comment 25.1.3.1.1 31 Mar 2010, 2:38 PM

I wouldn't say its the same, the highrise are all expensive while the existing ones are all cheap. Expensive attacts criminals looking for rich pickings.

If its ok for you to say increased crime is ok in Hornsby, then whoever is suggesting 20 stories in other suburbs (is it Radas?) is just reflecting the same morailty back on you aren't they? Is that an issue?

crisis Comment 25.1.3.1.1.1 31 Mar 2010, 3:30 PM

What on earth are you talking about? I never said that increased crime is ok and I don't think that anyone else did either. you must have gotten mixed up.

luisalow Comment 25.1.4 6 Apr 2010, 1:29 PM

Removed by moderator - the comment failed to respect other users

luisalow Comment 25.1.5 6 Apr 2010, 1:34 PM

Also, what Bellini D means by mixed use is that buildings incorporate both residential, commercial, public.

Not, wham one big office building there, another big mc-mansion style of apartment there and a westfields there.

That is not mixed use at all.

I have actually been acosted many times at Hornsby Westfields by lads who loiter around the fountain because quite frankly, they probably have nothing else to do.

I have been harassed, attempted to have drugs sold to me etc.

Mixed use like Haussman's boulevards..

http://chestofbooks.com/travel/france/John-Stoddard-Lectures/images/A-Parisian-Boulevard.jpg

http://www.theflews.com/Paris/Week06Pictures/Paris0676Le%20Boulevard%20des%20Capucines.JPG

http://idata.over-blog.com/2/42/82/29//B-raud-Boulevard-des-Capucines.jpg

http://jamescharlesobrien.files.wordpress.com/2007/12/surry-hills.jpg

Much more pleasant and supports local businesses and endevours.

Clem Comment 26 27 Mar 2010, 8:51 PM

The only way to stop high rise development or in fact over development of any type is to stop immigration. The Government is allowing 300,000 migrants to enter Australia every year. Once here, they have to live somewhere, and the vast majority of them choose to live in capital cities and close to transport. Australian cities will eventually become totally over populated like the cities in Asia and India unless we speak up now and inform the Government that we want these massive record high immigration levels cut. Look around people and do something now before it is too late. Nothing in this comment is racist. It is all fact.

Cat Comment 26.1 29 Mar 2010, 8:28 PM

It's too late, one has to accept our multi multi multi cultural Hornsby Shire, I live in Waitara and I have to remind myself every morning that I'm still living in Australia not China or India...as I said above, one just has to accept this.

Clem Comment 26.1.1 29 Mar 2010, 8:35 PM

Cat, please don't give up. It doesn't have to be too late. Australia is too beautiful for us to just sit back and let it turn into another China or India. We musn't let this country become totally ruined by over population as has happened in those countries. Write to Kevin Rudd, Tony Abbott and Phillip Ruddock, and urge your families and friends to do the same.

Radas Comment 26.1.1.1 29 Mar 2010, 11:36 PM

Actually guys the people from China, India and Korea are very nice if you take the time to get to know them, they are really just like you, and can cook some pretty tasty food if you are invited over.

I would agree with you about overpopulation (including Kiwis and British, American or Canadians). No use packing them in just for big business, and because we have to support an ageing population, surely there's another solution.

That's the last you'll hear from me on immigration.

Clem Comment 26.1.1.1.1 30 Mar 2010, 8:06 AM

Radas, no-one said they weren't nice people. We just don't want Australia turning into another China or India. We want it to remain Australia.

Cat Comment 26.1.1.1.1.1 30 Mar 2010, 8:23 AM

I admire your passion Clem, but realistically writing letters to politicians is like making Christmas cards with the mentally ill.

I guess it's just the law of entropy playing out. Everything begins at a high state and ends in total decay, then the cycle repeats...

Anyhow I've made my discussion, I'm leaving the Shire after many generations of my family living here, thankyou for your concern.

crisis Comment 26.1.1.1.1.1.1 30 Mar 2010, 9:17 AM

Then, if you are leaving why are you getting so passionate and so targeted in your comments?

crisis Comment 26.1.1.1.1.2 30 Mar 2010, 9:19 AM

And that would be?

matilda2 Comment 26.1.1.1.1.2.1 1 Apr 2010, 9:47 PM

I agree with the comments on reducing immigration. I find comemnts about china and india racist and inappropriate for such a forum. We are lucky to live in a diverse country. Could you imagine eating steak and three veg every night of your life?

Clem Comment 26.1.1.1.1.2.1.1 10 Apr 2010, 10:04 PM

That comment does not even make sense. I don't need to live in an over-populated, over-developed country to not eat steak and three veg every night. China and India are mentioned as examples of countries that are over-populated and this leads to over-development. This is not racist, it is fact. And it is entirely appropriate because this forum is about over-development.

hornsbydisaster Comment 27 28 Mar 2010, 1:33 PM

I fail to understand how the council works! We are not Singapore or Hong Kong with limited land mass. What is the purpose of localizing the 20 story structures to a limited area?

This is absolute basics of planning, you clearly will over stress the infrastructure around that part of town resulting in severe inconvenience to people.

The planners have also failed to notice there are two sides to the station and there are many sides around the Hornsby shire where the density is a lot less? Why would you over populate the road next to the main shopping centre? My more…

 

Pack Comment 27.1 4 Apr 2010, 12:33 PM

Hornsby Disaster commented that we are not in Hong Kong/Singapore.

Oh I thought we were !

Anyway jokes aside, none of the comments here take into account that we are at present entering a no growth era.

It is quite likely that even if the buildings are built they may not be occupied.

Have you driven down Pacific Hwy at night ?

All those big blocks have only one or two windows lit up.

The first financial loss in a no growth time is a lack of credit finance. The council is totally unaware that we are

now starting into a no growth economy and is planning for

a business as usual economy that will not exist.

Both state and Federal governments are also blind to what is

happening.

What do ratepayers do about this ? Well I am damned if I know.

All I can suggest that you start reading up on what is going on in the coal, gas and oil world and see how out of touch the government and councils are with reallity.

Radas Comment 28 4 Apr 2010, 8:24 AM

Take a walk down Ada Avenue in Wahroonga from the Pacific Highway, then turn left and you will be amazed to see many brand new apartments tucked into the topography which you would never even know existed unless you go down there. That is an excellent example of planning - density that is not too high, buildings which are hidden, and still close to the train station and shopping village.

xfactor Comment 29 7 Apr 2010, 2:14 PM

I am sure response times by ambulances and emergency services to and from Hornsby Hospital will be compromised by the increase in density and traffic around Hornsby and Waitara putting lives at risk. Don't forget residents from Ku-ring-gai Council area also use this hospital as well.

xfactor Comment 30 8 Apr 2010, 11:24 AM

It’s just doesn’t make any economical and social sense to replace 470 dwellings with just 599 dwellings in Linda Street Precinct. That’s only a net gain of 129 dwellings. You don’t need to build 5 times higher just to get 129 extra dwellings (even 5 or 6 storey buildings will easily produce the 129 extra dwellings). This is an ill thought out costly exercise by Council to unnecessary displace thousands of residents and business owners with no real gain or benefit. Besides, the current buildings in the precinct are well kept and maintained and can last for decades to come. So leave the current 3 storey walk-ins and businesses as is. Even if you delete this precinct out the Housing Strategy, the target of 2600+ new dwellings for the Shire will still be met.

disheartened Comment 31 8 Apr 2010, 12:40 PM

Hornsby Hospital budget was cut by $9 million dollars this year (according to local paper). Do people in flats not get sick or something?

When is Hornsby hospital going to be upgraded to accommodate all these new people both in Hornsby and the surrounding northern precints?

Kevin07 Comment 31.1 12 Apr 2010, 7:28 PM

they will need to goto the private hospital down the road $780m upgrade approved as reported in the Advocate last week.

Cat Comment 31.2 13 Apr 2010, 10:26 AM

It's a political issue regarding Hornsby Hospital upgrade.

Our state labour government over the past 13 years has slowly cut funding to Hornsby Hospital. In fact I recall the "Save Hornsby Hospital" car bumper stickers.

Twiff Comment 32 13 Apr 2010, 2:17 PM

This development should go ahead. Albert Lane and the units therein look onto other units, not a lot of green space as you all claim.

In fact unless you are lucky to be in one of the units that fronts Albert Street it is already a concrete jungle ripe for the youngsters to graffiti their little hearts out.

The proposed dwellings look like a god send. There will finally be conformity which will improve the overall look of the CBD, rather than the red brick dwellings, next to white bricked dwellings next to yellow bricked dwellings, it currently looks hideous

xfactor Comment 32.1 13 Apr 2010, 3:20 PM

This development should not be going ahead. Do we want to be like Chatswood? Traffic and parking there is a nightmare especially on weekends and Thursday, Friday nights.

The laneways around Linda Street precinct are too narrow mostly only one way one lane road and no parking, therefore are too close for skyscrapers. Not only that infrastructure such as drainage and sewerage require to be upgraded according to Council to accommodate these skyscrapers. But due to Council financial constraint, they could not afford to upgrade them any time soon even with the proposed infrastructure levy.

Also, it does not make sense more…

 

Twiff Comment 32.1.1 14 Apr 2010, 12:35 PM

Under the review it will be more like 75% of Strata Owners have to give consent, but considering that in my building there are only 2 owners out of 20+ and the rest being tenants I would presume that they will not object as they are already investment properties. You suggest 5-7 storeys, but then say leave the 3 storey walk ups and businesses alone? So you want development to go ahead but not in the area put forward.

As for the arguments the detractors of development keep on harping on about i.e. parking, net gain of property etc you more…

 

Kevin07 Comment 32.1.1.1 14 Apr 2010, 1:07 PM

Outlaw golf in the entire shire. That should provide plenty of area to develop.

matilda2 Comment 32.1.1.1.1 16 Apr 2010, 3:02 PM

Haha...I made the same comment to a friend yesteraday. I agree with you Kevin07- there is no place for huge golf courses that can only be accessed by a select few ;-)

xfactor Comment 32.1.1.2 14 Apr 2010, 2:45 PM

Develop South Dural the owners there wanted to be rezoned for 3000plus dwellings.

Townhouses for Sherbrook Rd between Waitara and Asquith, thoses fibro houses there are in much worst shape than any buildings in Linda St precinct.

Hornsby Westside is crying to be knocked down and rebuilt, it has been rezoned previously for high density mix development but nothing has happened.

Linda St precinct has already been rezoned for mix high density back in the 90s so its not new precinct for housing.

Twiff - you said "Everyone complained about Berowra, Asquith in the first proposal and now you are complaining about this?" Of course I and many in this forum complain this because we live and care about the area just like Berwora and Asquith and this proposal will destroy the area forever. Would you like to live on the ground floor facing 20storey skyscraper? Of course not. If 1 or 2 storey mcmansions in Berowra and Normanhurst can't replace with 3 or 5 storey units than its equally unfair to replace 3 storey walk-ins with 20 storey skyscrapers.

crisis Comment 32.1.1.2.1 14 Apr 2010, 3:12 PM

The area of Normanhurst in question is not full of mcmansions.

I also know that Normanhurst residents were strongly recommending that the South Dural proposal be fast tracked and be part of the housing strategy, so as to save other areas. Unfortunately this did not happen and everything seems to have gone quiet on the matter.

I know that there are many people who think that South Dural should go ahead sooner rather than later. This is one issue that everyone can start to lobby for if they believe this is a good option.

Kevin07 Comment 32.1.1.2.1.1 15 Apr 2010, 12:22 PM

I spoke to a HSC Town Planner about the Dural Site during the exhibition period the first time around.

The reason given why it's not included is simply due to the lack of effective transport in that locale. The rules for proposed precincts were simple, had to be close to existing transport hubs. A few bus stops along a single bus route does not qualify as an existing transport hub.

That is why it has all gone quite.

Twiff Comment 32.1.1.2.2 15 Apr 2010, 9:41 AM

Xfactor - you said "Would you like to live on the ground floor facing 20storey skyscraper? Of course not."

It would make no difference, as I live on ground floor looking at Westfield car park, the difference is that there will be green areas incorporated between the new high rises, have you seen the plans? They are allowing for more greenery than is already present in the Linda St precinct. Take into consideration that the new developments generally have sound proofing and bobs your uncle people like me don't have to go to sleep listening to idiots talking on the street outside, this was never a problem 20 years ago when Hornsby was - "the bushland shire" - so bring on the development

xfactor Comment 32.1.1.2.2.1 15 Apr 2010, 12:13 PM

The green spaces you are talking about are private for residents only they are not public parks, so unless you live in one of them they are no use to anybody

ramsay Comment 32.1.1.2.2.2 15 Apr 2010, 12:41 PM

New high rises don't have much sound proofing, just look at Waitara and Pound Rd Hornsby, you can hear thumping from above and they don't have good insulation extremely hot during summer and freezing during winter. The old 3 storey are better made and will last longer than the new high rises like Waitara

Twiff Comment 32.1.1.2.3 15 Apr 2010, 9:44 AM

And on another note you talk about traffic congestion etc, have you ever caught a bus to south dural or been caught on pennant hills road? Maybe you jumped on the train to Dural (oh that's right they don't have the infrastructure). People buying high rise want to be centrally located so the Dural site, although a good site due to space requirements and out of sight out of mind for Hornsby locals would stand empty for eternity.

xfactor Comment 32.1.1.2.3.1 15 Apr 2010, 12:22 PM

Read other people's comments - we said better infrastructure before any development and it doesn't matter where you live. We just can't trust governments to deliver any infrastructure until they are delivered. Just look at the mess with North West/South West rail on again off again.

Twiff Comment 32.1.1.2.4 15 Apr 2010, 9:49 AM

And while I am having a rant and it seems as though you all live in the Linda Precinct, take your damn trolleys back to Westfield! I am sick of returning them for you.

ramsay Comment 32.1.1.3 14 Apr 2010, 2:54 PM

Frank Sartor ex planning minister got the sack last time round after he announced the 75% rule because it's unpopular. This is unlikely to be passed since we are close to an election.

crisis Comment 32.1.1.3.1 14 Apr 2010, 3:13 PM

Not so long ago there was an article in the paper about the government wanting to revisit this.

xfactor Comment 32.1.1.4 15 Apr 2010, 12:27 PM

Twiff you will need at least 3 buildings not just yours to give way for 20 storey monsters which is highly unlikely. Investor won't sell cause they won't be reasonably compensated.

Twiff Comment 32.1.1.4.1 15 Apr 2010, 2:21 PM

Well to be honest the 8 people on this forum are not going to make a difference one way or the next. I've said my piece and now I'll leave the decision in the capable hands of the councillors and the the general populace.

Good luck either way

probbin Comment 32.1.1.4.1.1 16 Apr 2010, 5:29 PM

I disagree - the 8 people can bring up items that are more important than other ones that people have thought about, and the council will take notice.

matilda2 Comment 32.1.1.4.1.1.1 16 Apr 2010, 9:50 PM

Probbin, I think you need to work a lot harder. simply saying that the other suburbs should share the load wont impress the councillors who deliberated for a long time over the previous version of the strategy. Think about some of the suggestions made in this forum about rezoning south dural and the car yards along the pacific highway so as to reduce the height of buildings in the CBD. Council want community feedback and to hear people making those kind of suggestions. Please think outside the square and try be considerate of others in the process.

Radas Comment 32.1.1.4.1.1.1.1 22 Apr 2010, 9:45 PM

It would be nice if everyone was considerate of others matilda2. In fact if that was the case probbin, nor myself, would not even need to comment on this forum as nobody would have suggested Hornsby centre be targetted.

kashmir Comment 32.1.1.4.1.1.1.1.1 22 Apr 2010, 10:53 PM

I'm speechless!

ramsay Comment 32.1.1.5 15 Apr 2010, 12:54 PM

Parking and traffic has been rubbish for years, then fix it before any development. Council promised to one day widen the lanes in the precinct but looks like this will never happen.

There are better and effective ways to spend developing other degraded areas such as inner west suburbs then displacing thousands just for a mere gain of 129 dwellings.

By the way, we are nothing like Chatswood, where are the blocks and blocks of offices in Hornsby? If we build these high rises where will we fit them? Mix development will not be enough. Even the newest building in the area which is Officeworks only built 5 storey which they know fits well with the surroundings.

eliz Comment 33 19 Apr 2010, 11:17 PM

I understand the feelings of utter frustration and fear by all of us undergoing the threat of rezoning, as my home is one of them. In reading through the comments made so far, I think that it is timely however that all of the shire work together to determine where housing should be built, that does not involve ANY homes being destroyed - Look at South Dural begging to be rezoned. Let's put the pressure on council/government to let them rezone.

There’s no point getting carried away by heresay and histerics. We have to look at the facts if we are to get anywhere. There is no point in any of us throwing cheap shots at anyone else - none of us want this. Lets all be nice to each other – Look at Ku-Ring-Gai, they are a united group for the whole area and they have big meetings and everything. Maybe we should all join together with them too. Government will have to listen eventually and if they don’t, at least we can say we did our best together – don’t let them ‘divide & conquer’ us all.

bellinid Comment 34 24 Apr 2010, 3:07 PM

To everyone who has been so critical of Normanhurst and accusing Normanhurst residents of having nominated Linda St Hornsby, Asquith, Waitara, Carlingford and anywhere else inappropriate, please read the following list taken directly from Volume 3 - Report on Submissions

Normanhurst submissions - Alternative Locations suggested:

Hornsby Westfield

Hornsby West Side

George Street, Hornsby

Pacific Highway, Waitara

Epping Town Centre

Beecroft Shopping Village

Pennant Hills shops

NOWHERE ARE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL AREAS MENTIONED.

SO PLEASE APOLOGISE!

c49742528a584211ef91361d1415e2cacb29528d