Sign In
or Create a new account
Precincts in Mt Kuring-gai
Council is trying to encourage more housing close to shops and train stations in Mt Kuring-gai. 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.
Relates to
document:
Housing Strategy Vol2 Pt03 MtKuringai Precincts (1.658 MB)
Comment 1 16 Mar 2009, 3:23 PM
From bushland shire to high rise shire.
A five story high building in Mt Kuring-Gai. Why stop with one , every block of land here is within walking distance of rail transport. One high rise on its own would stick out like...well i will leave that to your own imagination.
Im sure some kid with his ruler and HB pencil will come up with a design that will blend into the natural landscape.
Comment 2 17 Mar 2009, 9:01 AM
Surely there are plenty of other opportunities within Mount Kuring-gai for additional housing rather than one 5 storey development? And given that ALDI are already considering redeveloping this particular property for commercial use only you would think it would make sense to review other areas? (Note - I've never heard of ALDI building residential developments!)
Mount Kuring-gai has long been recognised for its 'village' atmosphere, one which would not typically lend itself to high density development, rather more suited to medium density / townhouse arrangements where neighbours are not being overshadowed by towering unit blocks!
There is ample opportunity for this style of development in Mount Kuring-gai which could be situated much closer to the train station, similar to that per recent developments around the Asquith area.
Comment 3 17 Mar 2009, 9:39 AM
"This urban design analysis recommends a series of controls that have a direct influence upon important outcomes such as:
Compatibility with the character and amenity of existing neighbourhoods"
How can any five storey development be considered compatible with the existing character of Mount Kuring-gai? As a 'young family' that have moved to Mount Kuring-gai 6 months ago precisely for the 'village feel' it offered, I agree with the previous comment that townhouse arrangements would be far more suitable here. I would also wonder why it is considered young families might be attracted to unit living north of Hornsby - if I wanted a unit, I would go to Hornsby itself for the convenience of transport and amenities offered.
For the 21 dwellings this offers I can't believe there aren't other suitable spaces in Mount Kuring-gai to provide more compatible housing.
Comment 3.1 17 Mar 2009, 1:31 PM
I think that the urban design analysis says this sort of thing for all the precincts. This makes one suspect that the analysis was very superficial and was just a way of putting together a string of appropriate phrases and concepts to make it look like it was indepth and serious. For $50,000 the urban designers could not have done much else. Plus lots of things would have already been decided beforehand anyway. Dodgy, unprofessional stuff.
Comment 4 18 Mar 2009, 2:34 PM
I am posting this in Mt Colah and Berowra sections too...
I have concerns about the safety of bringing more people into Mt Colah, Mt Kuring-Gai and Berowra when there is effectively one road in, and one road out. In a bushfire situation there is roadblock and there has been no planning amongst different sectors on how to remedy this. Council needs to have an emergency plan in place for how to coordinate traffic when bushfire is in this area. You are planning on putting high-density housing right on the main escape routes.
Comment 5 11 May 2009, 8:14 AM
Page 2 of today's (11/05/09) SMH - PLANNING COUP FOR DEVELOPERS. Dept of Planning has been overhauled so that senior staff who were not sympathetic enough to developers have been given the boot, thus paving the way for developers to maraud Sydney like visigoths.
Check it out!
Comment 6 19 May 2009, 6:23 PM
I came to live in the 'BUSHLAND Shire' to be overlooked by bushland,
NOT five story high-rise!
Comment 7 21 May 2009, 3:13 PM
In the recent Housing Strategy forums held by Hornsby Councils' Planning Department, one of the posters read;
" The Challenge for Hornsby Shire:
How can council ensure an adequate supply of houses to meet state government requirements based on predicated growing & aging population, while PROTECTING BUSHLAND, PROPERTY VALUES, EXISTING RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER & NOT OVERBURDENING ROADS & SERVICES?"
By any measure, Hornsby council planning has NOT ACHIEVED ANY of its stated objectives!
A five story flat roofed public housing style box building planted in the middle of of predominately single story pitched roofed housing is the very antithesis of the stated objective; blighting the bushland, reducing our property values, destroying the residential character & overburdening our roads & services!
Comment 8 27 May 2009, 5:13 PM
NO LEGITIMACY—NO CONSTITUTION—NO HEAD OF POWER
The following are based not on assumptions but “officially” admitted FACTS.
The Australian Constitution DOES NOT recognise ‘local government’
Attempts by the “government” to alter the constitution to recognize ‘local government’ have failed TWICE. The last Referendum was held on the 3rd of September 1988. 67% of the population REJECTED the proposal for recognition of a third tier of “government”, namely, local “councils”.
The result of any Referendum is LAW. Despite that clear unmistakable affirmation of the Constitution by the people of Australia IN ALL STATES, the “government” (Hawke) introduced the ‘Local Government Act 1989” more…