187 Peats Ferry Rd Hornsby NSW 2077 Australia

Mixed - Shop Top Housing Comprising 249 Residential Units - Demolition - Heritage

External link Read more information

We found this application for you on the planning authority's website over 1 year ago. It was received by them 3 days earlier.

(Source: Hornsby Shire Council, reference DA/201/2018)

19 Comments

Have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. Carolyn Cannings commented

    I do not agree with this application for building a 24 storey building on Peats Ferry Road. For a start, any new building should be aesthetically complimentary to the current buildings, this proposed building would completely dwarf the west side of Hornsby. It would also open the doorway for other developers to submit DA's for unnecessarily tall/high rise buildings.

    Traffic in and around Hornsby is busy on the quietest days. The roads are used by through traffic from other suburbs as well as by local residents going about their daily business. Road rage is on the increase because there are always traffic jams and tailbacks. Should Council dare to approve this DA, how many more cars will be trying to access Peats Ferry Road in the most difficult section of that road? Will this mean more traffic lights? Even less street parking because of the need to open up a second lane for through traffic? Less parking will mean some local businesses will lose a considerable amount of business because their customers cannot park nearby.

    Reports have been released time and time again saying that Sydney does not need any more home units, it has reached its quota. Hornsby is a Sydney suburb. Hornsby does not need any more high rise buildings. Nor does anywhere else in the entire Hornsby Shire.

    Please do not approve this Development Application.

  2. Rachael Guest commented

    I object to this development application on the following grounds:

    - Traffic Congestion
    The increase of residential dwellings in the area will add to the already existing traffic congestion on Peats Ferry Road. Most people own at least one car so the number of cars on the roads will increase. The roads surrounding the proposed development are not adequate to withstand more traffic.

    - Lack of car parking
    Already the car parking in the area surrounding the proposed development is inadequate. More residents will only make car parking more scarce.

    - Out of Character
    The proposed development is out of character for the West side of Hornsby. It certainly is not in keeping with the heritage of the area or surrounding facades. Such a development will not revitalise Hornsby West side, only ruin it.

    - Overshadowing
    A structure of such significant height will create a negative impact on the surrounding environment through over shadowing.

    - Visual Bulk of Building
    A building of such size will impact the outlook of neighbours in Dural Street and dominate private open space. This is not acceptable for neighbouring residents.

    - Overlooking & Loss of Privacy
    The proposed development will overlook surrounding residences and impact negatively on their privacy. Furthermore, it will overlook Hornsby Aquatic Centre. This is a serious breech of privacy, particularly when so many children utilise the aquatic centre facilities.

    - Overdevelopment
    The area of Hornsby is already over developed. We have reached our quota of residences required. This proposed development is not being built to further improve the quality of life or housing availability of current residents but purely for development’s sake.

    - Lack of Schools & Recreational Facilities
    There are not enough schools or recreational facilities in Hornsby. The schools in the area are already overcrowded. Adding more residences will add further strain and negatively impact the quality of life of the existing residents.

    I implore you to make the right decision for the residents of Hornsby and its’ surrounding communities.

  3. Dr Jon Wilson commented

    I object to this proposal. I agree 100% with the views expressed by Rachael Guest

  4. Clark Lam commented

    The Westside of Hornsby needs to be developed to bring it to the 21st century.
    We need a proper CBD with new shops, offices, facilities etc to create jobs and vibrancy in the area.
    So I agree with the development as long as concerns about infrastructure is addressed. It is time to do something.
    We've had a redevelopment planning passed and approved for almost 7 years and nothing has happened so far. The time is now.

  5. Mr Li commented

    Please leave the West side alone this proposal should be thrown out! The traffic in the area is already abhorrent and the West side had a great Heritage feel!!!!! Please do not allow this to happen, please stop turning Hornsby into a High rise slum. Please Mr Ruddock we voted for you to PROTECT our SHIRE. Enough is enough I do hope the citizens of the shire join together on this one and FIGHT the GOOD FIGHT to protect our Shire from over development. Hornsby Shire has exceeded it's state housing quota and guess what the roads are congested, the hospital is full, the schools are full, the Dr waits are 2 hours as the medical centres are full, we have Westfield we dont need anymore shops! It is time to draw a line in the sand and stand up to greed and developers and say enough is enough!

  6. Kathy Wallace commented

    I object to this development on the following grounds:-

    * Does not reflect community attitudes as to how the Westside should be developed - past community consultation indicated the community wants the westside to avoid the high rise nature of the east side with preference to lowrise community orientated spaces and development

    *Heritage - simply retaining a small facade of 2 buildings and relocating the preschool building within the site is considered in the DA docs as "a modern interpretation" of the heritage streetscape - all I see is basically surrounding the 2 heritage small sections of the development facade as surrounded by modernistic buildings - with no real connection

    * Out of character - 2 towers (13 & 21 storeys) is totally inappropriate size and scale for that precinct - the top heavy nature of the building design (where the higher floors of the 21 storey tower have a bigger floorplate size than the street level) makes it look totally unappealing visually

    * Traffic congestion - ask any Hornsby resident and they will tell you that traffic is becoming a nightmare in the area. The traffic report in the DA docs also indicates that many areas within Hornsby have been identified as being at close to capacity at peak times. This will only make it worse. There is the common developer/council line that people should use public transport more. Sure, if your destination is within the current public transport infrastructure and you are not tied to getting kids to/from school etc - it is unreasonable to expect everyone to get everywhere by public transport. Improve commuter infrastructure first please.

    * Pressures on schools, childcare etc - although the DA hints at inclusion of a day care facility - the shire is already at breaking point with schools etc - this needs to be addressed before adding more people to the area.

    *Construction management - I am already living with the nightmare of construction next to me (old Centrelink site) - I pity the poor residents and existing local business owners coping with the trucks/noise/dust and disruptions that occur - to date all complaints to Council regarding works outside DA conditions have not resulted in any action/fines being taken against developers. Residents always lose out.

    *Environmental impact - We all have heard the "bushland shire" being spoken of, but we are quickly losing the sense of the bush when monstrous building developments like these are springing up everywhere - the landscaping reports attached to the DA show little (if any) streetside landscaping - with references to rooftop gardens and central podium areas only getting a superficial treatment of plantings. As they talk in the reports of the development being at the gateway to Hornsby, it is sad that there is no greenery in sight.

    Please do not allow this development to be approved.

  7. Marie R Kibble commented

    I have lived in Hornsby Shire for over 40 years and have read of proposed developments for the 'old side' of Hornsby on and off over those years and still nothing much has happened.
    Please just get on with it. In my view, which I accept is probably not a widely popular one, the West side is run down, unappealing, windswept and desperately in need of redevelopment. I am at a loss to know what the 'Heritage' aspect is - there are a couple of facades that might be worth saving but really, where is the so called 'Village atmosphere' and 'Heritage aspect'? I'm beginning to think it is in the minds of wishful thinkers! Planning has to be for the future but also, if at all possible, has to save what is historically relevant to the past. Hornsby Council will have to find a way to manage the traffic concerns legitimately raised by the naysayers and other issues of concern. Increased traffic will no doubt be affected too by the RSL future development plans but with careful planning and good management surely a solution can be reached. Good luck!
    PS With burgeoning population growth in the Shire I feel that the schools' capacity to cope with increased and ever-increasing enrolments needs to be addressed very soon.

  8. Ben commented

    I agree with Marie. The west Side needs some revitalisation to bring Hornsby to a new era. However, some points need to be considered
    1. Maintaining the heritage facade and development are not conflicting each other. Development does not mean demolishing all historic memories. On the contrary, a good design should utilise these heritages.
    2. Whether the number of units is excess. Hornsby and Waitara have a lot of existing apartments and units . Some people believe the market has already the warning of over supply. Time will prove it right or wrong. But one thing for sure is we don't want the new development to have a negative impact on these existing apartments and units while attracting more people to live in Hornsby. And most buildings on the west side are single dwelling houses, 21 levels might be too 'outstanding' and break the harmony.
    3. Except the apartments and a supermarkets, the development should provide more commercial and retail opportunities in the public interest. Now I can't even find more than three good restaurants in Hornsby and have to go to other area! Chatswood has both Chase and Westfield attracting residents from both upper and lower north shore. Hornsby as a regional center and transport hub still have a lot of retail and commercial potentials. The new precinct should retain the local residents and also bring in more nearby people. This will also promote the east side as well and create more local job opportunities.

  9. Laikan Ng commented

    Agree 100% with Marie Kibble.
    Let's not block development because of some infrastructure / heritage issues.
    They can be managed at the same time and find solutions instead of a blanket objection to development.
    Come on Hornsby Council let's get cracking and work towards the future, otherwise at the current rate nothing will be done for another decade.
    Hornsby Westside is looking more and more tired looking !!!

  10. Jacqueline Taylor commented

    Two decades ago, I wrote to The Advocate on the matter of the development of the west side. At that stage, I would have liked to see cafes, book shops, pedestrian areas, markets, laneways and trees.

    The west side has been in limbo all of this time. Waiting, waiting, deteriorating and no improvements made as there is scope for large scale plans 'in the future'. I would like a pedestrian light for the crossing from the station, but have been told that as there are bigger plans in motion, there is no point in dealing with such things right now.

    So I am open to suggestions for an evolving population and perhaps Hornsby needs to embrace its standing as a hub/large centre? However maintain trees, communal spaces, ensure parking/traffic flow is well considered and allowance made for cyclists. Encourage places for people to meet, chat and consider the visual aspect of design. Big can be beautiful. Consider how people need to live if residential, ie there needs to be spaces to hang out washing.... keep it contained within the development not out on residents' crowded verandahs, or use shutters. Ensure that open spaces remain and we can feel the sun on our backs and the relief of shade on our cheeks. Ensure good landscaping is incorporated. Be wise with plant choices. The plant choice near the lifts on the Eastern side are poor. They are forever yellow. Better choices could have been made.

  11. Mr Li commented

    I object to this development on the following grounds:-

    Westside should be developed in accordance with community consultation - residence in the immediate made it clear that the area was to maintain the low rise of the westside to avoid the high rise nature of the east side.

    Heritage - simply retaining a small facade of 2 buildings and relocating the preschool building within the site is considered in the DA docs as "a modern interpretation" of the heritage streetscape - Hornsby will look like Chatswood and North Sydney you will destory the village feeling.

    Extremely out of character for this immediate area - 2 towers is totally inappropriate size and scale for that precinct - the top heavy nature of the building design (where the higher floors of the 21 storey tower have a bigger floorplate size than the street level) makes it look totally unappealing visually and loose all village feeling

    Traffic congestion, Hornsby is already over burned with roads it can take 15-20 minutes to travel 1km along Petes Ferry or George Street. The traffic report in the DA docs also indicates that many areas within Hornsby have been identified as being at close to capacity at peak times. This will only make it worse. There is the common developer/council line that people should use public transport more. Sure, if your destination is within the current public transport infrastructure and you are not tied to getting kids to/from school etc - it is unreasonable to expect everyone to get everywhere by public transport. All our local streets are parked out by unit dwellers with the average 2.5 cars to 1 car space.

    Pressures on schools, Hospital, Doctors, childcare etc - although the DA hints at inclusion of a day care facility - the shire is already at breaking point with schools and the local Hospital - this needs to be addressed before adding more people to the area.

    Construction management this is a busy precinct for buses taxis, rail buses and station drop off and pick up. There is no way this will not impact daily lives of those trying to move around the village

    Environmental impact - We all have heard the "bushland shire" being spoken of, but we are quickly losing the sense of the bush when monstrous building developments like these are springing up everywhere - the landscaping reports attached to the DA show little (if any) streetside landscaping - with references to rooftop gardens and central podium areas only getting a superficial treatment of plantings. As they talk in the reports of the development being at the gateway to Hornsby, it is sad that there is no greenery in sight.

    Hornsby Council have EXCEEDED State Housing Quotas go build this in Gordon which is actually Zoned for it

    Please do not allow this development to be approved this has significant ramifications for future generations and a burden to existing infrastructure.

  12. Ben commented

    Further to my previous comments, Hornsby is developing the quarry, which can be developed in conjuction with the west side. In order to attract tourists, there should be hotels or service apartments considered. Hornsby, in mid way between city and central coast, should do better to serve tourists or hikers.
    As far as I know, Ryde provides free shuttle bus to Top Ryde. Why can’t we have the same service to bring local and nearby people to Westfiled and the west side precinct? The developer can also share part of the costs as more people more profits for them. This can also help the local traffic.

  13. Vandra Mellers commented

    I thought we had put this issue to bed! This development is just not in character with this local area. The following are some of the issues concerning this development.

    Traffic:- currently in peak hour, and other busy times traffic just crawls through this area. Add another few hundred dwellings with their accompanying cars and this area will turn into a polluted traffic jam.

    Car parking:- is at exhaustive levels already on the east side. There just has to be a function on at council or the RSL club, and parking is at a premium.

    Out of character:- the east side of Hornsby is lucky to still retain some of the old charm of yesterday. Fake facades with towering buildings will just not do justice to what remains of old Hornsby.

    Overdevelopment:- I think Hornsby has more than paid for the State governments eye for development. The quiet suburb of Asquith is just full of towers. Our beautiful bushland shire is becoming another casualty of State government planning.

  14. diane c holdsworth commented

    I read that Hornsby has already filled 96% of its obligation to provide added accomodation and that we are some years ahead of doing that in any case

    the concept of high rise also on the old side, on top of what is on the east side is simply obscene. I live where I can see the blocks of units. With tree removal and build of towers.....the skyline is hugely changed. Lovely twinkly lights to look at at night for me....but generally a nightmare to navigate. So..... I personally simply do not. Online shopping works well for me and looses business to local shops. I will not be the only one

    It is time to stop. The whole place is a shoppers/parking nightmare generally and no place for anyone with any sort of disability wanting /needing to move between "sides"

    diane

  15. John Way commented

    Increase frequency services especially weekend 575 route...its a joke now and earlier and later services all day...infrastructure should match the over development the money is there...do you want labor to win bradford and berowa?

  16. Rodger commented

    We need again to look at the proposal to make old mans valley ,valley road a gated community, top of Pretoria parade Gated, top of Rosemead Gated , we don't want that type of development hear keep it in the Train station Westfield part of Hornsby .

  17. Donald Watt commented

    I am entirely against this development for the following reasons:
    1/ Character: This building is completely counter to the surrounding environment and out of character entirely to the West Side. As a resident of the West Side I feel strongly that the charm of the area is what makes it a wonderful place to call home. I am surprised that this was ever approved in a Heritage area! This modern monstrosity will completely change the area, taking away the unique atmosphere it currently has. It makes no attempt whatsoever to blend into it's environs. it is an eyesore in what is a very quaint old area; an area that could be developed to support community.

    2/ Infrastructure. To add this many people in this already congested spot shows no foresight and will undoubtedly negatively affect, traffic flow, transportation capacity, car parking spots and foot traffic.

    3/ Environmental Impact. This is this visual pollution. Has any thought at all been given as to how this many people suddenly in one spot will tax all our current services such as sewer, sidewalks and the like.

    I strongly urge you to reconsider this development. It is your job to represent the people who voted for you. Has this project been properly publicized? Has the West Side community been canvassed for their opinions? Those that I know (the few that know about this) are extremely unhappy.
    To me this smacks so much of government corruption. I would bet if there was more money to be made out of a park then we would be getting a park. It has nothing to do with what the area needs but only reflects what this government wants.
    This development can only have negative consequences and is part of a global trend of government making promises and then doing whatever makes it the most short term gain.
    I am disgusted by this narrow approach. The attitude that would approve this kind of building is the self- serving attitude that is destroying our fragile culture and environment both in Hornsby and globally.
    I do not want this in my backyard.

  18. Susan Thompson commented

    I am shocked, heartbroken, and frankly incredulous to learn of the proposed development on Peats Ferry Rd. I can only imagine that it is the idea of some slick, greedy developers, as it is impossible to see who else might stand to gain should such a project go forward; certainly the residents of the West Side of Hornsby do not stand to benefit. I have yet to hear a single thoughtful, intelligent, compelling reason to go forward with this proposal. Not a single one! I would greatly appreciate it if someone could enlighten me as to why such a project is even being considered. Anyone…?

    Conversely, I have heard and read and concur with the numerous objections delineated by the many intelligent and thoughtful residents of Hornsby – many who have posted their concerns on this PlanningAlerts.org website. These arguments include: increased traffic congestion and the accompanying noise and air pollution, insufficient parking, the already inadequate sewage treatment facilities and subsequent devastating environmental impact that’s already been visited upon the creeks and rivers down to the Hawksbury, the inability of the local fire department to handle a “towering inferno” should that happen – which of course it very well could, the difficulty the current school system is having accommodating the children who already live here, insufficient recreational and health services, and of course, the fact that such a monstrosity would be completely incongruent with and effectively destroy the character and feel of the West Side.

    It is upon this last concern that I would like to further expound. In my opinion, not enough has been said or can be said about this utterly critical issue which, in essence, comes down to an issue of values. What do we actually value as a culture? Even if we were somehow able to completely resolve all the incredibly serious infrastructure issues to everyone’s satisfaction, this proposal simply cannot be allowed to go forward for considerably more powerful reasons.

    Since my family moved to Hornsby’s West Side five years ago, I have come to appreciate the many qualities that make this particular shire unique and attractive: proximity to nature, easy access to public transport, and - most of all - the unique, low-rise, human-scaled Heritage architecture of the West Side. Someone on the PlanningAlert website referred to the West Side of Hornsby as “run down” and, yes, it could no doubt benefit from a little TLC. But I - for one - see something very different here. Indeed, I am struck by the beauty of the West Side skyline every time I stand at the Pacific Hwy crosswalk on my way home from the train station; and I have sent many a photo to friends and relatives who agree that I am so lucky to live in a place that still retains such beauty and personality - that has not (yet) been made completely homogenized and uglified by narrow-minded/cold-hearted commercial interests. Another notable example of the personality of the area (and a frequent backdrop for photo–taking by me) is the magic of the alleyway that runs between William St and Dural with it’s charming mural that inspires me to walk out of my way on my way home no matter how tired I am. These things are precious and need to be cherished, preserved, and, as we can, expanded upon – not replaced!

    Except on market days or when there’s some sort of special live music event in the square outside the mall, I have seen my trips to Westfield and the east side of the tracks as a necessary evil. When I leave there, I am relieved and give thanks that I can return back across the bridge to our home on the much cozier West Side. I am not a big shopper, but I find that I actually enjoy strolling up and down the streets of the West Side past the small shops and restaurants with their open doors and windows inviting passersby to peer in or come inside, and sometimes even spilling out onto the foot path - facilitating interaction and connection. Contrast this with the proposed cold, impersonal, pristine, and utterly uninviting façade of your basic generic mixed-use building such as the one proposed - more or less sealed off from the outside world save for an automatic door or two. I mean, seriously…where would you rather hang out and enjoy and cup of coffee with friends? And once you’re inside, it’s not much better: the shops are much like those found in a mall - laid out in a way to encourage and optimize consumption not human enjoyment.

    Urban planning theorist, Jane Jacobs, wrote: “Lowly, unpurposeful, and random as they may appear, sidewalk contacts are the small change from which a city’s wealth of public life may grow.” I find this to be so true. Indeed, were it not for the “sidewalk contacts” I made on the West Side, I wouldn’t have even known about this ridiculous and obscene proposal. I walk past the proposed building site often, and have yet to see any sign or notice informing residents and shop owners of the horror of what’s in the works. Only ads for planting trees; how strangely ironic!

    The historical significance of this area alone warrants taking steps to preserve, rejuvenate, and expand in kind; however, these existing buildings are so appealing and so worth saving not simply because they are old, but because – regardless of when they were built - they were built in a way that honors one's aesthetic sensibility, that integrates with rather than overpowers the beauty of the surrounding natural landscape, and that supports and encourages meaningful social interaction. Surely these things should be primary considerations when one is planning the future development of a city.

    But fear not! We are not lost in the desert or alone, and we are certainly not naïve in attempting to do something that values human beings (and the nature we are all part and parcel of) over the almighty dollar. There is a wealth of information out there which supports such a stance and to which we can avail ourselves – research from cutting–edge engineers, architects, urban planners, and social scientists who have been studying the subject of urban design for a very long time. They have much to offer us in the way of ideas and information about what it takes to create buildings and spaces that people actually want to be in. Spaces that promote getting to know and care about your fellow citizens – yes - that actually inspire a feeling of altruism. Spaces that put the needs human beings and ecological concerns above those of commerce while paradoxically encouraging a robust yet humane economy.

    If this proposal is allowed to manifest, it will not be the fault of the opportunistic developers. Sadly, they are like programmed robots doing what they are programmed to do; and as the automatons that they are, they are merely ignorant and/or without consciences and do not know and/or do not care what they do to our shire. But as resident human beings of this shire, you, the members of the Hornsby Council, DO know what you would be doing if you allow this proposal to move forward, and you DO know what stands to be lost here. As a member of the Hornsby Council, it is your moral duty to represent the citizens of Hornsby by standing up and saying “NO!” to a development proposal clearly motivated by the monetary gain of a few and which shows absolutely no regard for beauty, for nature, for the heritage and unique character of this area, and for the quality of life of the humans who actually live and spend time here.

    I beg you, please do not let Hornsby become another victim of thoughtless, short-sighted, greed-driven city planning that has led to the careless deterioration of so many cities into ugly, generic, subhuman, high-rise-filled abominations built to encourage commerce not community. Renovate and rejuvenate and expand the West Side - Yes! - But let’s do it in a way that preserves what’s left of its unique character and that honors the human need for beauty, intimacy with nature, and intimacy with each other; and let’s do it cooperatively - with strong community consultation.

    I have never written anything to oppose any kind of development before in my life. But how can I not speak out now, in the face of such blatant lack of sensitivity and true intelligence? I mean, one is compelled to ask: Who and what hidden motivations are actually running the show here?! It boggles the mind and confounds the heart. But whoever you are and whatever is motivating you to propose such a plan - and I suspect you do know who you are – please, please, please realize that whatever “gain” you believe that this development might bring to you personally or even to the people of Hornsby as a whole – please, please, please realize that it is absolutely NOT worth the cost. It unequivocally is not; because in exchange for that paltry monetary or otherwise quantifiable “perk", you will, henceforth, be culpable for having destroyed something that is irreplaceable - something that is priceless - something that these words can only point towards and that once taken is lost forever - the soul of a city, the heart of Hornsby - taken by a rash and careless act of a council briefly charged with the responsibility of this city’s future so apparently easily taking down the path of crass over-development.

  19. Karla commented

    Well said all can I just add if Developers and Members of Local & State Parliament had to live in the suburb they build and approve in, our Shire and Sydney city would be a different landscape. I concur with the above comments from our local community opposing the development on the grounds of adverse impact to our community, lack of infrastructure, not keeping with the surrounding street appeal, and close proximity the awfully busy intersection next to the pool/park.

  1. Have you made a donation or gift to a Councillor or Council employee? You may need to disclose this.

  2. Please use your real full name if possible.

  1. We never display your street address. Why do you need my address?

This week

Find PlanningAlerts useful?

This independent project is run by a local charity, the OpenAustralia Foundation. PlanningAlerts is powered by small, tax-deductible donations from the people who use it to stay informed about changes to their local area. If you find it useful, chip in to support PlanningAlerts.

Back PlanningAlerts