On Tuesday I seem to have sparked some interest / controversy by sharing an example of how a heritage item can be incorporated as part of a larger development site, with the heritage item?s land used to provide uplift elsewhere on site.
My Tuesday post was not an endorsement of the TOD controls. In fact I think the TOD controls are ill-conceived and with no prior consultation with local councils. The Planning Minister?s lack of genuine good-faith collaboration is disappointing, and it is the reason why we are currently involved in legal action.
Multiple residents have also asked me whether the idea of site consolidation only applies to Willoughby Council, or whether there is any precedent within Ku-ring-gai for this to occur. So this time I?ll give you an example from Gordon.
25 Bushlands Avenue, otherwise known as ?Birralee?, is an example of a Federation Bungalow style house and garden built c. 1915 that was made possible by the provision of public infrastructure to support the growth of suburbs like Gordon as an alternative to living in the inner city. You can read more about it here.
https://www.hms.heritage.nsw.gov.au/App/Item/ViewItem?itemId=1882351
On 16 November 2017, as newly appointed members of the Sydney North Planning Panel, Councillor Spencer and I were asked to consider whether it was appropriate to develop a residential aged care facility on the amalgamated site of 25, 25A, and 27 Bushlands Avenue under the predecessor to the Housing SEPP. The developer had proposed to retain the heritage building and most of its garden in the existing form, and instead to use its land to establish additional uplift rights at 25A and 27.
Both Councillor Spencer and I disagreed with this concept and we argued that?
“The Proposal will have adverse impacts on the heritage item at No. 25 Bushlands Avenue (Birralee)“
and that
“For the reason of excessive encroachments into the curtilage of No. 25 Bushlands Avenue the proposal will have an unacceptable impact on the heritage significance of the heritage item.“
You can read more about it here.
https://www.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/planning-panel/residential-care-facility-8
However the planning panel is comprised of 2 councillors and 3 state-appointed members so the state overrode the councillor opinion 3 vs 2 and said that it was fine to incorporate the heritage item into a larger development.
Ultimately the development was refused by the Sydney North Planning Panel on other grounds, however it then went to the Land and Environment Court on a Merits Appeal where it was approved.
But we do see here that both the regional planning panel and the Land and Environment Court are open to consolidated sites with uplift shifted around under the Housing SEPP. There are residents who disagree with my statement here, but I can only tell you what I have seen with my own eyes. I personally believe that many residents have been ill-advised by property developers seeking the lowest hanging fruit. Heritage items and heritage conservation areas are too messy to deal with when there are 45 TOD precincts to choose from across NSW, so they will not want to get involved with heritage unless they can offer prices that are substantially below the genuine underlying value.
