At the August 2024 council meeting we resolved to:

🙋‍♀️ Adopt a Prevention of Violence Against Women Action Plan, a first for Ku-ring-gai.

🏡 Put on public exhibition for at least 28 days an updated Planning Agreement Policy. Planning Agreements are a legal agreement between a developer and a planning authority where planning controls are varied in order to achieve a public benefit. Some examples may be to dedicate land for public recreation, environmental protection, road widening, or an extra road while allowing the developer to build an extra storey. It’s usually a win-win for both public benefit and future housing.

🌇 Modify and then support two Planning Proposals for a retirement village (110 homes) and residential development (181 homes) in Turramurra, to be sent to the Department of Planning for ‘Gateway Determination’. The Department of Planning will review the planning proposal and conditions before it goes to Public Exhibition and Assessment.

🚌 Write to the Minister for Transport and the NSW Premier to accelerate the delivery of rapid bus services along Mona Vale Road.

🐶 Explore setting up a small dog park at the site of the former Gordon Bowling Club site.

🗒️ Provide terms to council’s lawyers for the court-ordered mediation with the State Government re: housing, noting that this would not have been necessary had the Planning Minister responded to any of my earlier requests for good-faith collaboration in the last ten months.

There were other items as well, which you can read about in the draft minutes. (I will update with a link when this becomes available.)

Thank you Ku-ring-gai for choosing us to serve you from 2022 to 2024. We just had our last official Ordinary Meeting of Council last night, and the Council will enter caretaker period from Friday 16 August through to the election on Saturday 14 September. Our General Manager David Marshall will be in charge during this period.

I have personally enjoyed working with each of the councillors and I wish them (as well as the other candidates) all the best in the coming weeks. I would also like to thank the staff for their contributions (within the guidelines set by the governing body) to what is predominantly a well-run organisation that seeks to serve you as ratepayers.

At Ku-ring-gai we want to create opportunities for the youth to participate in policy and projects that matter to them, so we have started a Youth Advisory Committee.

Applications are open til 13 September.

If you know anyone who may be interested in participating, please check out the website.

https://www.krg.nsw.gov.au/Council/Council-meetings/Committees-and-Panels/Youth-Advisory-Committee

One thing that we are in the process of improving at Council is the way that we consult with or notify the community regarding proposed changes.

An example of this is Traffic DAs where our staff will traditionally send a notification to nearby households (eg 10 or 20), and then make a recommendation based on any feedback received. However these notifications may not necessarily go out to the wider group of residents who are affected by the traffic proposal, and a ward councillor may end up asking for the notification to go out to a wider group.

To assist with this process, I’ve asked the staff to make some of the larger impact matters available for online consultation so that we can reach a wider group of people.

We experimented with this approach when a roundabout was proposed to improve safety conditions at Trafalgar x Clanville. The traditional notification only generated a few responses, so when we switched to online we received quite a lot more. [I have not yet seen what these responses say.]

The process can still be improved. On hindsight I should have actively shared the consultation link on social media, and will aim to do so next time.

https://krg.engagementhub.com.au/clanville-trafalgar-roseville-proposed-roundabout

Earlier this month our Council’s Flood Risk Management Committee explored the implications of different flood mapping methodologies on properties in our LGA.

As context, each Council is required by the State to ensure that their flood areas are mapped and properties appropriately tagged as this impacts where residents can safely build as well as what future infrastructure is required to support.

At Ku-ring-gai we’ve broken up the LGA into their respective river / creek catchments and we are systematically going through each one to model and understand which properties are impacted under various flooding scenarios.

We do so based on current available data, which means that the increased rainfall from future climate change and increased velocity of runoff from state housing increases and non-compliant construction are not baked into the modelling. In other words, the modelling may understate actual impacts that are experienced in the coming years.

At the same time, we have residents who will push in the other direction…. They are generally motivated by concerns that addition to a flood map leads to increased insurance premiums.

Council generally explores the impact on each property on a case by case basis, so for example if the flooding is expected to only impact 1 sqm of the corner of a property then we are happy to remove the tag from that property. But if modelling with reasonable assumptions shows that a large portion of the property may be affected (even prior to climate change / increased density scenarios) then we would have to exercise our responsibility by tagging the property.

The current focus is on Middle Harbour North and the next area will be Lane Cove catchment. We will later cover Cowan Creek, Ku-ring-gai Creek, Lovers Jump Creek, and Spring Gully Creek when the funding becomes available.

For more information visit https://www.krg.nsw.gov.au/Environment/Sustainable-living/Prepare-for-extreme-weather/Flooding

From time to time we receive complaints about the Coles development at Balfour Street Lindfield, primarily in relation to traffic delays that it causes on Balfour Street and perceived breaches of the conditions of consent which say “𝘍𝘰𝘳 𝘴𝘢𝘧𝘦𝘵𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺, 𝘯𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘷𝘦𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘭𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘰𝘤𝘤𝘶𝘳 𝘪𝘯 𝘉𝘢𝘭𝘧𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘚𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘵 𝘥𝘶𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘤𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘭 𝘥𝘳𝘰𝘱-𝘰𝘧𝘧 (8:00𝘢𝘮 𝘵𝘰 9:30𝘢𝘮) 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘱𝘪𝘤𝘬 𝘶𝘱 (2:30𝘱𝘮 𝘵𝘰 4:00𝘱𝘮) 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘴𝘤𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘭 𝘥𝘢𝘺𝘴.”

Residents have also said that council has done nothing to prevent these perceived breaches but that is not the case. The construction site has been fined over $80,000 to date for various offences.

I think it’s important to break down what is and is not a breach, because we will have many more construction sites like this in the years to come as part of the TOD precinct.

So I went down there yesterday morning to observe what was going on.

First of all, this condition of consent applies to construction vehicles. That means concrete trucks, excavators, demolition trucks, heavy transport.

The condition of consent applies to construction vehicle MOVEMENTS which means that if we see a construction vehicle parked on the street but it is not moving, then it is not a breach.

There are other things like forklifts, cranes, machinery, scaffolding, which are counted as plant and equipment. In other words, forklifts are not construction vehicles, they are plant. And if you see a forklift driving or a crane operating during those peak hours then there is no breach because they are not construction vehicles.

What was annoying, however, is that from time to time the lollipop ladies would pop out and block off traffic along the entire street so that the forklifts can pickup skip bins, etc. This probably took up 5 of the 90 minutes that I was there, and if I was a resident driver on Balfour Street waiting to get to work, I would be very annoyed and blame Coles for everything….. I gave our Director of Regulation a call and he explained to me that the lollipop ladies were part of the construction traffic management plan, and that the intent of the condition of consent was to prevent heavy construction vehicles from hurting pedestrians from a SAFETY perspective. That is, the condition of consent was not designed to optimise traffic flows, and there will always be some level of disruption associated with construction.

I did also see two skip bin trucks moving that morning, but the Director said that these were not construction vehicles. They were ‘ephemeral’ and only there to quickly pick up or drop off something before they were gone. He explained that the condition of consent was with regard to longer, more drawn out activities.

I also saw five concrete trucks pop out from Bent Lane turning right onto Balfour Street, before turning right onto Pacific Highway. While these do count as construction vehicles, they were not in relation to the Coles Development so their movements are not a breach of the conditions of consent.

Out of all the things that I observed, there was only one thing that the Director agreed was illegal. I noticed that the utes on Balfour Street were parked for longer than the 1 hour allowed. The Director said that rangers do come here from time to time to issue fines, and that he’d send rangers onto this case.

So other than the illegal parked utes, it was a relatively good morning for the construction firm. But just because they were good this morning, doesn’t necessarily mean they’re like this all the time. They have been fined over $80,000 to date after all.

But we shouldn’t jump to conclusions that they are breaching the conditions of consent or that council is doing nothing about it just because we see a few lollipop ladies and forklifts moving around.

Whether the conditions of consent should be broadened to cover lollipops and forklifts is a separate point of debate, but those are not the conditions of consent for this particular site.

And if you do see anything that you suspect is actually illegal, please let us know straight away.

At the July 2024 council meeting we resolved to:

🏘️ Identify suitable planning controls for dual occupancies, which are to be introduced by the State Government in Ku-ring-gai on 01 July 2025. [Councils without existing planning controls like minimum lot size have been given a one year to establish controls whereas most councils commenced this month.]

📐 Work towards delivering upon the Planning Minister’s Statement of Expectations for all Local Councils, including the improvement of DA turnaround times and the updating of strategic planning documents to reflect new short term housing targets and State Environmental Planning Policies.

📄 Request an interim heritage order on the 23 heritage conservation areas within our four TOD precincts, until planning for these precincts is finalised early next year. This is an unusual request that has been rightly raised by Council in the context of an even more unusual decision from the State Government with regard to 6-9 storey developments in federal and inter-war heritage conservation areas. In both of my meetings with the Planning Minister there was a clear unwillingness to honestly explain how 22m / FSR 2.5:1 can be achieved in such areas, so we now put the question to the Heritage Minister for consideration.

⚡️🐶 Investigate further updates to Council’s planning controls and net zero initiatives to support growing demand for electrification, other energy efficiency initiatives, and allowing doggy daycares in town centres.

📹 Update the Code of Meeting Practice to support the live-streaming of the Council’s monthly public forum. The updated Code will soon go out to public exhibition for public feedback before council votes on the final document.

🌳 Allocate funding for the annual round of Environmental Levy Grants and Sponsorships.

🙋‍♀️ Appoint members of the Status of Women’s Advisory Committee.

🎭 Note a report on the potential cost of reviving the Marian Street Theatre with minimum repairs, and asked for further detail on a pathway / timeline to expanding the theatre as per a previous development application (DA0144/20).

There were other items as well, which you can read about in the draft minutes. https://eservices.kmc.nsw.gov.au/Infocouncil.Web/Open/2024/07/OMC_16072024_MIN_WEB.htm

The NSW Government has committed to delivering 377,000 well-located homes over five years – and it expects Ku-ring-gai to deliver its share of 7,600 in the same period.

A critical element of delivering these targets is the government’s ‘Low- and Mid-Rise Housing’ (LMRH) Reforms. And over the weekend the government announced its approach by gradually updating parts of its website.

It appears that the LMRH is now split into two stages.

Stage 1 of LMRH, which commenced yesterday on 01 July 2024, allows for dual occupancies to be installed in any R2 low-density residential zone across NSW with the exception of certain sites that are affected by flood, bushfire, individually listed heritage items (but not heritage conservation areas), or other criteria.

Some residents will consider stage 1 of LMRH to be good news, as it makes it easier to enter the housing market and allow multi-generational families to live in proximity while having their separate space.

However at Ku-ring-gai we also recognise that if dual occupancies are implemented with the non-refusal parameters that the NSW Government had proposed in December 2023 (minimum lot size 450 sqm, floor space ratio 0.65:1), then it will have a detrimental impact on our urban tree canopy, biodiversity, climate resilience and heritage.

The problem that I have with the announcement over the weekend is that it is silent on the minimum lot size and floor space ratios for dual occupanices. And in the absence of these parameters, the impacts of these dual occupancies are unknown.

As a Council, we have previously proposed more appropriate parameters to the Department of Planning, and we will be following up to confirm its support to provide you as residents the certainty that you need.

Stage 2 of the LMRH involves additional density around train stations and town centres. Further details will be announced later in 2024 (I suspect after the Local Government elections to safeguard Labor candidates) with an implementation date set for the second half of 2̶0̶2̶5̶ 2024 [Department website said second half of 2025 on 01 July but when I checked again this morning it said second half of 2024].

T̶h̶e̶ ̶s̶e̶c̶o̶n̶d̶ ̶h̶a̶l̶f̶ ̶2̶0̶2̶5̶ ̶i̶m̶p̶l̶e̶m̶e̶n̶t̶a̶t̶i̶o̶n̶ ̶d̶a̶t̶e̶ ̶i̶s̶ ̶a̶c̶t̶u̶a̶l̶l̶y̶ ̶g̶o̶o̶d̶ ̶n̶e̶w̶s̶ ̶b̶e̶c̶a̶u̶s̶e̶ ̶K̶u̶-̶r̶i̶n̶g̶-̶g̶a̶i̶ ̶a̶s̶ ̶w̶e̶l̶l̶ ̶a̶s̶ ̶o̶t̶h̶e̶r̶ ̶c̶o̶u̶n̶c̶i̶l̶s̶ ̶h̶a̶v̶e̶ ̶b̶e̶e̶n̶ ̶a̶s̶k̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶D̶e̶p̶a̶r̶t̶m̶e̶n̶t̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶P̶l̶a̶n̶n̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶f̶o̶r̶ ̶m̶o̶r̶e̶ ̶t̶i̶m̶e̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶c̶o̶n̶d̶u̶c̶t̶ ̶l̶o̶c̶a̶l̶ ̶p̶l̶a̶n̶n̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶f̶o̶r̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶L̶M̶R̶H̶.̶ ̶I̶t̶’̶s̶ ̶g̶r̶e̶a̶t̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶h̶e̶a̶r̶ ̶t̶h̶a̶t̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶D̶e̶p̶a̶r̶t̶m̶e̶n̶t̶ ̶h̶a̶s̶ ̶l̶i̶s̶t̶e̶n̶e̶d̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶o̶u̶r̶ ̶f̶e̶e̶d̶b̶a̶c̶k̶,̶ ̶b̶e̶c̶a̶u̶s̶e̶ ̶i̶t̶ ̶i̶s̶ ̶c̶o̶u̶n̶c̶i̶l̶s̶ ̶w̶h̶o̶ ̶a̶r̶e̶ ̶b̶e̶s̶t̶ ̶p̶l̶a̶c̶e̶d̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶d̶e̶t̶e̶r̶m̶i̶n̶e̶ ̶w̶h̶e̶r̶e̶ ̶d̶e̶n̶s̶i̶t̶y̶ ̶s̶h̶o̶u̶l̶d̶ ̶g̶o̶.̶ [Paragraph stricken out due to Department of Planning website update on morning of 02 July]

Having said that, we are still in disagreement with a separate set of reforms called ‘Transport Oriented Development’ (TOD). These reforms were imposed on a small radius around Gordon, Killara, Lindfield and Roseville earlier this year.

Despite multiple requests to have sufficient time to plan for the TOD, the NSW Government pushed ahead with their April timeframe. The financial impact on ratepayers is over ten million, and to recover the costs we have had no choice but to take the State Government to court.

I have spoken to the Minister on 02 May and subsequently written to him twice saying that the court action can be avoided if he were to be consistent and given Ku-ring-gai the same opportunity for local planning that he gave to 12 other councils for the TOD (and now 128 councils for the LMRH stage 2). All he has to do is lift the map for our four TOD precincts and set a deferred commencement date in 2025. But he has not been interested in backing down from his position, so the only way we can protect your ratepayer funds is to go through the courts.

In May, Council also resolved for staff to identify different density scenarios for each of the four TOD precincts and to commence a public consultation process towards the end of this year.

N̶o̶w̶ ̶w̶i̶t̶h̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶d̶e̶f̶e̶r̶r̶e̶d̶ ̶c̶o̶m̶m̶e̶n̶c̶e̶m̶e̶n̶t̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶L̶M̶R̶H̶ ̶s̶t̶a̶g̶e̶ ̶2̶,̶ ̶i̶t̶ ̶m̶e̶a̶n̶s̶ ̶t̶h̶a̶t̶ ̶K̶u̶-̶r̶i̶n̶g̶-̶g̶a̶i̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶o̶r̶e̶t̶i̶c̶a̶l̶l̶y̶ ̶h̶a̶s̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶o̶p̶p̶o̶r̶t̶u̶n̶i̶t̶y̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶c̶o̶n̶d̶u̶c̶t̶ ̶p̶l̶a̶n̶n̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶f̶o̶r̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶8̶0̶0̶m̶ ̶w̶a̶l̶k̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶d̶i̶s̶t̶a̶n̶c̶e̶ ̶a̶r̶o̶u̶n̶d̶ ̶e̶a̶c̶h̶ ̶t̶r̶a̶i̶n̶ ̶s̶t̶a̶t̶i̶o̶n̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶S̶t̶ ̶I̶v̶e̶s̶ ̶s̶h̶o̶p̶s̶.̶ ̶I̶f̶ ̶w̶e̶ ̶c̶a̶n̶ ̶g̶e̶t̶ ̶i̶t̶ ̶d̶o̶n̶e̶ ̶b̶e̶f̶o̶r̶e̶ ̶m̶i̶d̶ ̶2̶0̶2̶5̶ ̶w̶e̶ ̶h̶a̶v̶e̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶p̶o̶t̶e̶n̶t̶i̶a̶l̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶p̶r̶o̶t̶e̶c̶t̶ ̶o̶u̶r̶ ̶u̶r̶b̶a̶n̶ ̶t̶r̶e̶e̶ ̶c̶a̶n̶o̶p̶y̶,̶ ̶b̶i̶o̶d̶i̶v̶e̶r̶s̶i̶t̶y̶,̶ ̶c̶l̶i̶m̶a̶t̶e̶ ̶r̶e̶s̶i̶l̶i̶e̶n̶c̶e̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶h̶e̶r̶i̶t̶a̶g̶e̶ ̶c̶o̶n̶s̶e̶r̶v̶a̶t̶i̶o̶n̶ ̶a̶r̶e̶a̶s̶.̶[Paragraph stricken out due to Department of Planning website update on morning of 02 July] ̶ ̶B̶u̶t̶ ̶C̶o̶u̶n̶c̶i̶l̶ ̶h̶a̶s̶ ̶y̶e̶t̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶d̶i̶s̶c̶u̶s̶s̶ ̶o̶r̶ ̶r̶e̶s̶o̶l̶v̶e̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶d̶o̶ ̶t̶h̶i̶s̶ ̶f̶o̶r̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶L̶M̶R̶H̶.̶.̶.̶.̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶l̶a̶s̶t̶ ̶t̶i̶m̶e̶ ̶w̶e̶ ̶c̶o̶n̶s̶i̶d̶e̶r̶e̶d̶ ̶s̶o̶m̶e̶t̶h̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶s̶i̶m̶i̶l̶a̶r̶,̶ ̶i̶t̶ ̶d̶i̶d̶ ̶n̶o̶t̶ ̶h̶a̶v̶e̶ ̶e̶n̶o̶u̶g̶h̶ ̶s̶u̶p̶p̶o̶r̶t̶ ̶d̶u̶e̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶a̶b̶s̶e̶n̶c̶e̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶l̶o̶n̶g̶-̶t̶e̶r̶m̶ ̶t̶a̶r̶g̶e̶t̶s̶ ̶f̶r̶o̶m̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶S̶t̶a̶t̶e̶.̶ ̶A̶n̶d̶ ̶w̶e̶ ̶s̶t̶i̶l̶l̶ ̶d̶o̶ ̶n̶o̶t̶ ̶h̶a̶v̶e̶ ̶a̶n̶y̶ ̶l̶o̶n̶g̶-̶t̶e̶r̶m̶ ̶t̶a̶r̶g̶e̶t̶s̶.̶ ̶Q̶L̶D̶ ̶h̶a̶s̶ ̶t̶a̶r̶g̶e̶t̶s̶ ̶t̶h̶r̶o̶u̶g̶h̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶2̶0̶4̶6̶,̶ ̶V̶I̶C̶ ̶h̶a̶s̶ ̶t̶a̶r̶g̶e̶t̶s̶ ̶t̶h̶r̶o̶u̶g̶h̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶2̶0̶5̶1̶,̶ ̶b̶u̶t̶ ̶N̶S̶W̶ ̶o̶n̶l̶y̶ ̶h̶a̶s̶ ̶a̶ ̶f̶i̶v̶e̶ ̶y̶e̶a̶r̶ ̶t̶a̶r̶g̶e̶t̶ ̶t̶h̶r̶o̶u̶g̶h̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶2̶0̶2̶9̶.̶ ̶S̶o̶m̶e̶ ̶c̶o̶u̶n̶c̶i̶l̶l̶o̶r̶s̶ ̶h̶a̶v̶e̶ ̶a̶r̶g̶u̶e̶d̶ ̶t̶h̶a̶t̶ ̶t̶h̶i̶s̶ ̶d̶o̶e̶s̶ ̶n̶o̶t̶ ̶p̶r̶o̶v̶i̶d̶e̶ ̶e̶n̶o̶u̶g̶h̶ ̶c̶l̶a̶r̶i̶t̶y̶ ̶f̶o̶r̶ ̶K̶u̶-̶r̶i̶n̶g̶-̶g̶a̶i̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶e̶s̶t̶a̶b̶l̶i̶s̶h̶ ̶a̶ ̶l̶o̶n̶g̶-̶t̶e̶r̶m̶ ̶L̶o̶c̶a̶l̶ ̶E̶n̶v̶i̶r̶o̶n̶m̶e̶n̶t̶ ̶P̶l̶a̶n̶.̶[Paragraph stricken out due to Department of Planning website update on morning of 02 July] ̶ ̶A̶n̶y̶w̶a̶y̶ ̶w̶e̶’̶l̶l̶ ̶s̶e̶e̶ ̶w̶h̶a̶t̶ ̶h̶a̶p̶p̶e̶n̶s̶.̶ ̶T̶h̶e̶r̶e̶’̶s̶ ̶s̶t̶i̶l̶l̶ ̶a̶ ̶l̶o̶t̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶a̶m̶b̶i̶g̶u̶i̶t̶y̶ ̶e̶v̶e̶n̶ ̶w̶i̶t̶h̶ ̶L̶M̶R̶H̶ ̶S̶t̶a̶g̶e̶ ̶1̶,̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶r̶e̶’̶s̶ ̶a̶ ̶f̶e̶w̶ ̶d̶e̶t̶a̶i̶l̶s̶ ̶f̶o̶r̶ ̶o̶u̶r̶ ̶s̶t̶a̶f̶f̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶c̶l̶a̶r̶i̶f̶y̶ ̶b̶e̶f̶o̶r̶e̶ ̶w̶e̶ ̶c̶a̶n̶ ̶f̶o̶r̶m̶ ̶a̶ ̶p̶o̶s̶i̶t̶i̶o̶n̶.̶ [It’s a bit ridiculous that I had to cross out a large chunk of this Facebook post…. The Department should check their material and their dates before publishing the details on the Internet.]

Link to 01 July 2024 webpage. https://web.archive.org/web/20240701140452/https://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/policy-and-legislation/housing/diverse-and-well-located-homes

Link to 02 July 2024 webpage. https://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/policy-and-legislation/housing/diverse-and-well-located-homes

As you know Ku-ring-gai aspires to reach Net Zero by 2040, and part of this involves encouraging residents to electrify their transport.

We will be introducing more EV chargers in the coming months, and we also want to encourage residents to consider making their next car electric.

The NRMA recently held an EV test drive and awareness event at the HART driving school in St Ives. I was joined by Councillor Martin Smith and Councillor Kim Wheatley and we saw a wide range of vehicles manufactured by BMW, BYD, Ford, GWM, Hyundai, Kia, LDV, Mercedes, MG, Renault, Tesla and Volvo. There was also a VW Buggy retrofitted as an EV.

It was a good opportunity to test drive a number of vehicles and at this stage I still say that my personal favourite is the Tesla Model 3. Tesla has had more time to refine their product and it stands above the rest.

At last night’s council meeting we resolved to:

🪆🍀 Develop a multicultural inclusion plan and fund a multicultural festival (think of our well-attended Lunar New Year festival, but bigger).

🏐🍁Make amendments to the Canoon Road Recreation Area Plan of Management to make the site safer to use for under 9’s and more accessible to all age groups.

🏃‍♀️‍➡️🏃‍➡️Reclassify the Roseville Chase Bowling Site to Community Land and develop a masterplan for future recreational use.

⚽️🏑Support Hornsby Council in lobbying for the retention of funding to develop Westleigh Park, which will provide critical infrastructure for residents in Northern Sydney.

📐🔍Make further improvements to our Enterprise Risk Framework and Internal Audit Charter, in alignment with updated requirements from the Office of Local Government.

🌆🏙️We also discussed 345 Pacific Highway, however that is a complex issue and I’d prefer to provide a more detailed post later this week after the recommendations of the Sydney North Planning Panel are also published. It’s not helpful to talk about it in little chunks.

Following considerable public interest as well as some confusion about the range of different housing policies and targets out there, the Council is running a series of community information sessions on the NSW Government’s Low- and Mid-Rise Housing SEPP changes.

The first session was held last night at Council chambers and it was well attended. There are further sessions available both in person and online, and if interested you are free to register to attend whichever one is most convenient for you. The content will be almost exactly the same at each session as the policy change applies consistently across NSW.

To register, visit

https://www.krg.nsw.gov.au/Planning-and-development/Changes-to-NSW-Government-housing-policy/Community-Forums-on-NSW-Low-and-Mid-rise-Housing-Policy

On 16 June, we are scheduled to plant trees at the West Pymble Village Green as part of a scientific and educational initiative on climate adaptation. This Tiny Forest will cover 5% of the site, and towards the edge. More information is available on Council’s website.

https://www.krg.nsw.gov.au/tinyforest

Reflecting on the overall comms leading up to 16 June, I think things could have been better.

We had fenced off almost half the site for related works / equipment movements, causing some residents to wonder whether half the site would be planted when in fact it is a much smaller area affected.

Council did consult nearby properties as part of the process and that should be commended, but with these plus our traffic developments, I think that in addition to household letters we can also provide more information on the website upfront and seek online submissions from the wider neighbourhood.

We will be revising Council’s Community Participation Plan in the coming months to improve the resident experience.

p.s. Photo was taken soon after my flu vaccination, hence the lollypop.

There are three separate State-led housing reforms that will lead to Ku-ring-gai’s population doubling within a few decades.

But we currently have residents out there (unintentionally or intentionally) mixing up the names of the reforms, mixing up suburb names, and mixing up the targets and durations so as to achieve their own political goals.

So just to be clear I will provide links to each of the reforms here.

NSW is seeking to deliver 377,000 new homes within 5 years under the National Housing Accord. Of the 377,000, Ku-ring-gai’s share is 7,600. https://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/policy-and-legislation/housing/housing-targets

As part of delivering the target, there are three separate reforms being applied by the State to Ku-ring-gai.

In December 2023 they introduced in-fill affordable housing provisions. https://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-12/in-fill-affordable-housing-practice-note.pdf

In April 2024 they introduced Transport Oriented Development Part 2 provisions. https://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-12/transport-oriented-development-program.pdf

This month they will be introducing Low- and Mid-Rise Housing reforms. https://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-12/eie-changes-to-create-low-and-mid-rise-housing.pdf

The NSW Government has just released its housing targets for each council to strive for in the coming 5 year period. For Ku-ring-gai it means 7,600 homes in the 5 years to 30 June 2029.

https://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/policy-and-legislation/housing/housing-targets

Under the state’s transport oriented and low- and mid-rise housing provisions, Ku-ring-gai can theoretically meet those targets. The supply is theoretically there. But my concern is whether there are enough construction workers to deliver on this theoretical target.

The target is also too short term. QLD has targets through to 2046, which allows councils to properly plan and deliver infrastructure for future generations. We believe that each council should receive a 20-year target to aspire to, and that councils are best placed to determine where the housing densities should go.

If Ku-ring-gai had the opportunity to deliver long term planning, it may result in the protection of heritage conservation areas and urban tree canopy in some places while other parts of each suburb may have greater density that improves the financial viability and timing of housing delivery.

It’s all well and good to offer councils a financial incentive for meeting these housing targets, but the main constraint here isn’t councils but is rather the availability of construction workers.

We joined other LGNSW councils this morning in meeting with the Minister for Housing and the Minister for Planning. Most of the questions were around the delivery of social and affordable housing.

They said that today, the Premier will be announcing each LGA’s share of the five-year 377,000 housing target. I can’t comment on it until I see the numbers, so we just sit and wait. 🍿 As for longer term targets for each LGA (which would help us with setting up a new LEP), there is currently no information.

I’m pleased to announce that Council has appointed our Acting General Manager David Marshall as Ku-ring-gai’s next General Manager.

During his seven months in the acting role, he has led a range of process improvements.

We conducted a customer service audit which led to improvements to our training, procedures and systems that will lead to more timely response in the coming months.

For residents concerned about the ongoing loss of tree canopy and habitat destruction, Council’s response is limited by State law but we have introduced order provisions under the EP&A Act to require replacement planting of illegally removed trees, with regular follow-ups and fines if the order is breached.

With our asset infrastructure backlog, we have identified new methods which may significantly bring down the cost of maintaining our ageing stormwater infrastrucutre…. expected savings of ~$100m over the lifetime of the assets.

We have introduced a library app and are investigating the provision of an app to cover borader council services.

We are now reviewing the Development Application process, seeing what we can do to streamline the process and improve the customer experience as a whole. Other service reviews will be announced in the coming months.

Internally, councillors are also getting better follow-up to their queries, regular activity updates, and a proactive response to regulatory change.

In particular, David has been responsive to each councillor’s concerns regarding the upcoming Transport Oriented Development and Low- and Mid-Rise Housing policy changes. His role is to proactively provide the councillors with information and options to consider, then to carry out whatever it is that Council resolves. It was also his proactivity that resulted in early resident notification in January when other councils had not yet grasped the implications.

There were other promising candidates in the selection process as well. I would have been happy to work with any of them, though was of the view that David would be the most appropriate for Ku-ring-gai at this point in time. Local Government plays a sepcial role in the community and I am encouraged at the talent that is contributing to the sector.