PlanningAlerts

1 Comment

Create an account or sign in to have your say by adding your own comment.

1. RE-ZONING OF 95 TO 97 STANHOPE TO MEDIUM DENSITY (the Proposal)

   Dear Panel Members,
   We refer to the application by Stockland Pty Ltd (Stockland) to re-zone 95 - 97 Stanhope Rd (Lourdes Village or the Village) from R2 Low Density Residential to R3 Medium Density Residential which we understand is now before Planning and Environment for consideration.

   We write to ask that you reject the re-zoning application on the basis of information provided below. While it is reasonable that Stockland should be able to improve on its investment, such improvements should be allowed for within existing planning guidelines. Be aware that the facility is under-utilized and impact assessment data is as a result flawed.

   We understand that following Ku-Ring-Gai Council (Council) unanimously rejecting the Proposal, Stockland has now submitted the Proposal to Planning and Environment seeking to overrule the Council’s decision and have the proposal instead approved. There is a real question of whether due process has been followed by Stockland.

   The proposed re-zoning, which will enable Stockland to more than double the size of the centre in terms of residents and staff, would be in reality a medium to high density development. If successful in its re-zoning application, Stockland contemplates construction of a medium density community hub with six storey buildings, a new Residential Aged Care Facility and a new Village “Main Street” in the middle of a residential low density area in a location at high risk of bushfire.

   Lourdes Village was constructed in 1983, amidst considerable opposition from local residents at that time. The argument used by the developers at that time was that it would not adversely impact local residents and the nature of this area of Killara.

   The Proposal
   We have recently spoken to householders nearby Lourdes Village, most of whom were not aware of the Proposal and those that were, thought the unanimous rejection of the Proposal by Council was an end to the matter. Council made a well considered and correct decision.

   All residents to whom I have spoken are strongly opposed to this Proposal for many reasons including those outlined below.

   1) Bushfire
   In the event of a fire there would be significant risk to the residents of Lourdes Village, many of whom are infirm, as well its staff, and local householders. Lourdes Village is located up the hill from a national park, bounded by a creek with a high level of undergrowth on the south and west in a bushfire zone with only one access road, Stanhope Rd which is a dead-end to the east.

   Stanhope Rd is a narrow road which in effect is a one lane road when it crosses the creek near Swain Gardens. Two cars may be able to pass, subject to parking, but not a bus or fire engine and a car. The bush fire exposure and the loss of life risk would be significantly exacerbated if a fire occurred when a function (which is often the case in summer) was being held at Swain Gardens. Rosebery Rd does intersect with Stanhope Rd prior to Swain Gardens, but again Roseberry Rd is a narrow road with insufficient capacity to cope with the traffic required to evacuate frail elderly residents and staff of Lourdes Village as well as local householders let alone allow emergency service vehicles to enter. Worldwide bush fires resulting in significant loss of life are becoming more frequent.

   2) Lourdes Village Residents
   The existing Lourdes Village residents are strongly opposed to this proposed redevelopment and have separately lodged objections to this proposed re-zoning. The proposed re-development will severely disadvantage residents who purchased and moved to what is a quiet residential area in a bushland setting, not contemplating that Stockland would be seeking to convert their village into a high activity hub.

   3) Traffic
   Stockland have submitted a traffic report that is far from complete. It only refers to Village residents and forms the view that the new residents will not travel in peak hour so more than doubling the off peak traffic is acceptable. The reports ignores increased traffic due to increased services and visitors’ traffic who will travel during peak hours. As well there would be significantly increased ambulances, bus traffic and the like to cater for a village more than double the size of that existing. The Village is serviced by only one public road, Stanhope Rd.

   4) Parking
   Stockland’s report advises that 1.5 spaces per self-contained units plus 1 visitor space for every 5 units. The report makes no mention of providing free parking for all staff and service providers.
   
   5) Noise
   Increased noise will significantly adversely impact the amenity of residents in the Village as well as householders who purchased their home knowing the closest medium density zoning was two kms away. The noise from the air conditioning of the proposed six storey buildings, ambulances, increased traffic, late night comings and goings of staff and visitors who have radios blaring, increased garbage pick-up compacting garbage for extended periods very early in the morning and such like will severely impact existing residents.

   6) Public Transport
   Lourdes Village is not close to public transport or any retail outlets.

   7) Visual Amenity
   The proposed six storey buildings sitting on top of the hill will be a significant loss of visual amenity for local residents and result in shadowing of existing dwellings. Further, the buildings by necessity will need to have significant lighting.

   8) Change of Nature of Killara
   This proposed re-zoning would create a high activity community hub in the middle of a residential zone to the detriment of local residents and village residents who live approximately two kms away from the nearest medium density zoning. It would establish a precedent for further rezoning in an area which does not have the infrastructure to support development on the scale proposed.

   9) Fairness
   It would seem that Stockland’s strategy is to acquire a low density retirement village in a dead end quiet area of Killara, rezone it to construct a high activity hub to reap the abnormal wealth gain that the rezoning would deliver to the detriment of the safety, health, amenity and wealth of local residents.

   Stockland is a developer seeking to obtain short term advantage. Stockland’s re-zoning application is opportunistic and without merit and should be rejected.

   We look forward to receiving your advice in relation to this matter.

   Yours sincerely,

   Adam & Erica Machon

Have your say on this application

Your comment and details will be sent to NSW Sydney and Regional Planning Panels. They may consider your submission when they decide whether to approve this application. Your name and comment will be posted publicly above.

Create an account or sign in to make a comment