Inspired by a post in another thread, I felt the need to start a thread on it.

It's something that upsets many of us forumers and some of us unfortuantely (like me :()live in those communities.

Being a shire resident, I cannot understand why Miranda and Cronulla refuse to allow more highrise, given that they would be built in very built up areas anyway, away from low density areas and within the town centres.

I look at Miranda and it's dominated by the mega sized Westfield Complex, which is nearly 1km long. In some sections the shopping centre is 10 storeys tall, yet the council says eight stories is acceptable????

And Cronulla has a habit of saying no to everything. They don't want outsiders coming in and the like, but look at Cronulla and see how much of the suburb is dominated by three storey walk up blocks. More space there for biggies without interfering with low density areas. And you can build tall and not overshadow the beach or waterways. In fact some 15 storey towers are hard to spot on the skyline from many angles. You can build tall and not be so dominating.

Eight storeys in the shire is too low particularly in those centres in the Shire!!! Sutherland Shire Council don't understand a thing :bash:

Any other places where the NIMBY's rule the roost???

Hi Fabian - I can understand yoyur frustration but the Shire is not the only place where nimbys rule the roost. The Ku-ring-gai municipal shire has always been very anti-development. In years gone by substantial amounts of its budget was spent on fighting developers proposals in the courts.

It wasnt until a few years ago when the then minister for Local Government, Dianne Beamer, threatened to remove their planning powers were they forced to review their denisty policy. Since then they have approved for up to 10 stories in Gordon and up to 5 stories in Lindfield, Turramurra and St Ives. These are all areas which the most you would ever see was three storey walk-ups and only around the train stations. I believe that the new planning minister still sees this as not enough and has once again threatened to take away plannning powers.

Personally, I think the council has been way to conversative in the planning for the Gordon Town centre. I think Gordon could become another Chatswood with the right push from council. 10 stories is not enough! I would love to see some 20 storey buildings there similar to Chatswood's Zenith towers or Citadel Towers (Vodafone building) in Gordon. With its height above sea level being about 150 metres and higher than most places in Sydney- you would be able to see the Gordon skyline from many places in the metropolitan region. They could take a leaf from Willoughby councils book and make some areas very high density to offset having araes of low density.....

Thats my rant.

Hi Fabian - I can understand yoyur frustration but the Shire is not the only place where nimbys rule the roost. The Ku-ring-gai municipal shire has always been very anti-development. In years gone by substantial amounts of its budget was spent on fighting developers proposals in the courts.

It wasnt until a few years ago when the then minister for Local Government, Dianne Beamer, threatened to remove their planning powers were they forced to review their denisty policy. Since then they have approved for up to 10 stories in Gordon and up to 5 stories in Lindfield, Turramurra and St Ives. These are all areas which the most you would ever see was three storey walk-ups and only around the train stations. I believe that the new planning minister still sees this as not enough and has once again threatened to take away plannning powers.

Personally, I think the council has been way to conversative in the planning for the Gordon Town centre. I think Gordon could become another Chatswood with the right push from council. 10 stories is not enough! I would love to see some 20 storey buildings there similar to Chatswood's Zenith towers or Citadel Towers (Vodafone building) in Gordon. With its height above sea level being about 150 metres and higher than most places in Sydney- you would be able to see the Gordon skyline from many places in the metropolitan region. They could take a leaf from Willoughby councils book and make some areas very high density to offset having araes of low density.....

Thats my rant.

LOL Fabian if you think the shire is bad take a look at Gosford City and the Councellor Malcolm Brooks, this OLD stalewart has single handedly helped to keep the CBD in the doldrums with his septagenarian shit.

Whillougby is rather progressive and top marks should be given to them, Ku-ring-gai is feral, what a bunch of whinging NIMBY whores! Areas like hornsby have done alot in recent years but I question the desire for bulky 10 story towers rather than slender 20 story towers ... take a look at Waitara (near the station) case and point! I guess the bigger some council areas are the better they can support a range of development types and density levels. I like to see many councils adopt a high rise strategy to ensure ground space and better amenity to residents in higher denisty environs.

Most of our councils are obstructionist with only a few being pro development and embracing change.

Sartor will be taking away Ku-ring-gai Council's planning powers. The State Government has had enough of the council's refusal to cooperate.

I know how bad Gosford is with the discussion in the Central Coast thread, and the region has paid for it economically as Business dont have the space and services required to base themselves there. It's the same with Wyong Council too. Look at how The Entrance is only getting midrisers, yet you can still build 15 storey towers in the town near the waterfront and wont be visible from far away

.....Whillougby is rather progressive and top marks should be given to them, Ku-ring-gai is feral, what a bunch of whinging NIMBY whores! Areas like hornsby have done alot in recent years but I question the desire for bulky 10 story towers rather than slender 20 story towers ... take a look at Waitara (near the station) case and point! .........

Couldn't agree with you more Avatar, but it would seem that Ku-ring-gai is hell bent on making the same mistake with Gordon allowing only 10 storeys....it has so much more potential....

Alpha Bravo, if you think thats bad - for work, at one point i had to go through over 20 years worth of residential development strategies for Kur-ring-gai Council... and every freaking strategy was the same - medium rise around Gordon, Lindfield, St Ives, Pymble, and Roseville, and the rest to be left as is... Everytime DoP (or equivalent) has tried to even inject some more variety into that (high rise towers, villas, townhouses etc) the council has fought back with everything it humanly can.

And if you look at the Metro Strategy, the proportion of additional people to km2 that is going into KMC is just appaling... essentialy the State has given into KMC - although i guess 20+ years of government departments (RTA, DoP, etc) fighting with them, they will give up eventually.

That Council is just NIMBY to the extreme.

There are midrisers starting to appear in St Ives but people were complaining to Alan Jones about it last week.

How tall is the existing Gordon Centre by the way?

I think Sydney's just an uber NIMBY city. It happens in EVERY council and it beggars belief.

I'm also a Shire resident and I'd actually like to see more development near the rail line which with the duplication now underway is an excellent candidate for densification.

I'd also like to see Sutherland's "interchange" upgraded but that's another issue.

Gosford Council need to get a life. They're out of space to build and they don't want high rise? I guess they don't want growth then.

Don't even start me on the suffocating rules stifling scraper development in the Sydney CBD.

Maybe you've heard my occassional rants ? ;)

In 15 years time it will be RIP DA SYD CBD as by then it'll almost be regulated into redundancy as an area for scraper development.

Ah James - you obviously experienced it first hand. It just really gets to me that a very significant part of rate paying funds has been used for fighting development proposals when the funds could have been better used to enhance and improve infrastructure in the Ku-ring-gai LGA. With such enhancements then maybe the higher denisties would not be such a strain....

One example I get annoyed about is council's seeming apathy towards completing the secondary North/South road route through the LGA. Pacific Hwy being the primary route is the responsibility of the RTA is already shocking which makes the need for the secondary route more critical. But the secondary route is a hodge podge of backlanes and avenues strung together by council with a plan to eventually create a standardised road but it has never eventuated in full. The section coming through Junction/Eastern/Burns/Killeaton Rds is shocking and carries more traffic than it was designed for. When I questioned council on their commitment to improving this piece of infrastructure - they said it is planned but not in the next 5 year plan and could not commit when it would be finished by - in other words never.

In 2005, I went to an information session the council had in Turramurra to advise residents and business owners of the planned new increased density for the suburb. The town planners at the meeting made it perfectly clear that this was not councils decision to increase density but rather a directive from the state govt and if they had it their way they would tell the state govt to stick it. A pack of pussies they were - deflecting all this back onto the state. Rather than work with the state to create a bold new vision for an LGA as part of the dynamic metropolis of Sydney - we get a backward, fingerpointing mob with no backbone. Where is the visionary leadership in all this?

The scary thing is that these types of councillors are being voted into council again and again - which means that Ku-ring-gai LGA residents are mostly Nimbys themselves....

Fabian - Gordon town centre currently has some office blocks along the Pacific Hwy where Sun Microsystems is and where Optus used to be (before relocating to North Ryde but these are maximum 3 stories - nothing really above this and yes in St Ives there is a lot of development happening with new apartment buildings going up but the people on Alan ones are whinging about it. The development at the moment seems to be focussed on St Ives but Gordon should be the real focus - it has the rail line - St Ives does not. So much potential here.....

Sorry for my rant but once I get started I dont stop.. I can go on forever about this....

I have never understood why they are expanding st Ives, the roads out that way are bullshit other than Mona Vale road. Its a real mess.

Gordon is ripe for development and sits in a great location with rail and a major road intersection - getting Ryde and Northern beaches through traffic as well as the traditional North South traffic. Why can't everyone see that to choose one area and exploit the beejeezus out of it it exactly what they really need to protect the rest of the LGA? hell they could wack up 50 story buildings and appartment towers in Gordon - give themselves a beautiful skyline and keep all the other areas intact. St Ives is so not suited to density god knows what they were thinking.

^^ Spot on Avatar! My sentiments exactly.

I'd also like to see Sutherland's "interchange" upgraded but that's another issue.



The station is in for a refurb :) Hope that turns out well.

Back on the northside at Ku-ring-gai, alot the midrise development is currently occuring along the Pacific Highway, which you have to admit is well away from the leafer areas.

I was on the train going through the Lower North Shore on Thursday through suburbs such as Wollstonecraft and Waverton and I could not believe the amount of mid and highrise development, yet most of it cannot poke themselves above the canopy.

Alpha Bravo - just as a side note about the Eastern Arterial Route (the second north south route) a friend of mine was telling me about what happened when it was proclaimed as a main route, and had signage put up saying things like "HORNSBY"... The council one night took down all those signs, and the RTA sued them and won. The Court ordered that the Council had to put back up road signs... which they did... however and to this day, thats why most the signs point to local areas, such as "EAST KILLARA" or whatever...

Also most the people i worked with, when i was dealing with KMC, all agreed that Ku-ring-gai Council really missed the boat with Gordon Centre. As it is almost exactly equidistant between Chatswood and Hornsby, it could have made a really good medium rise commercial centre surrounded by residential. And given how Gordon exists on the Ridge, you could have ended up with something quite interesting, say Hurstville, but given the money that lives in the area, you probably would have had greater design outcomes. Would have been win-win for the local residents as well - large commercial areas usually subsidise the rates of the residential areas...

The Sutherland Shire is also another really NIMBY council - though at the same time it was quite progressive. That said that council has councilors that have quite a bit of animosity for the State Government, which lead to some interesting friction apparently with the SSLEP 2006. Sutherland CBD, especially to the east heading to the existing high rise precinct near the Library could easily hold some 10-15 storey apartment towers, without overshadowing any residential areas, and create a really good focal point for the area - especially if they just level the existing Council building and start the entire entertainment precinct area again - It would make a fantastic town square, surrounded by these high rise apts... but yeah i digress...

To me Miranda is a little bit different - because of how imposing the Westfield is there, you would need some really tall apartment towers - say 20+ stories, to make much impact, and that is probably far beyond the comprehension of the people who live there. As someone who lived nearby there - the people can be NIMBY to the point of extremism.

The Council which i'm currently working for with the Standard LEP, has done a lot of work on increasing densities and allowing for more medium rise apartment towers, albeit there wont be too many "scrapers" given where it is - and has put a lot of work into this - however it is yet to be seen whether we can get this through the local population. Its not hugely progressive, but its still a significant step up.

Alpha Bravo - just as a side note about the Eastern Arterial Route (the second north south route) a friend of mine was telling me about what happened when it was proclaimed as a main route, and had signage put up saying things like "HORNSBY"... The council one night took down all those signs, and the RTA sued them and won. The Court ordered that the Council had to put back up road signs... which they did... however and to this day, thats why most the signs point to local areas, such as "EAST KILLARA" or whatever...

James, if what youre saying is true then my perception of KMC being filled with typical spineless bureacrats is true. Fancy doing that - I have often wondered why the signage on the Eastern Arterial Route (EAR) is not consistent....
Anyway as an aside I noticed a few years back that part of the road reserve for EAR just west of Junction Rd at Wahroonga along Eastern Rd all of a sudden had some townhouses built on it...fancy allowing the building of townhouses on land reserved for a road that is SORELY needed..... I heard a rumour that council sold part of the land to raise funds - Just a rumour and dont know if its true but the fact that this development was allowed to progress puts a further nail in the coffin for the EAR - shows how
(un)committed KMC really is to the project...

Gees I get angry at these things...

Cannot believe that Frank Sartor is now a NIMBY, yet a few months ago he loathed them more than anything.

This was filmed at Brighton Le Sands on Sunday as Rockdale Council want to build a carpark on sand dunes. The woman in the black dress talking is Rockdale Councillor Lesa De Leau (Greens) who opposes the development and is likely to be fined by council for speaking out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bT5zVr4C6-o

yeah, but it's a carpark, so it doesn't get much support from me either.

I dont want the carpark either. It's common sense not to build on sand dunes.

I think Caringbah is the place that could use some talls, a lot of people don't like the one they built towards the north end of the kingsway but I think it looks fantastic ! Certainly better than the old Endeavour arcade, what a dump.

They should build a 10-15 story tower on the car park on the adjacent to the railway on the east side of the Kingsway, what a great location. You could put a few levels of car parking underground so there's no loss of parking. Then there's the car park on the western side near Coles, although I'd use that for a more open space area for people with the car park underground, sort of like a piazza.

I remember Caringbah as a kiddie and it was a thriving place before Westfields bought Miranda Fair, it needs more people in the CBD, not just in coles & woolies.

You might be impressed to hear that Sutherland Council is looking at a highrise project for that carpark at Caringbah!!!!

Really ? Last council election every man and his dog running for council seemed to be anti-highrise, especially that car park in Caringbah.

Maybe the right ones got in.

NIMBY power squashed by the Supreme Court...

Locals lose battle against Luna Park
February 6, 2009 - 8:39PM

Attempts by a group of Sydney residents to shut down noisy rides at nearby Luna Park have failed in the NSW Supreme Court.

The Lavender Bay residents had taken the amusement park operator to court, trying to have rides like the Ranger shut down and moved to another part of the site.

They said the rides' noise levels and the screaming thrill-seekers had made life unbearable since the park reopened in 2004.

But in a judgment handed down in the NSW Supreme Court today, Justice Paul Brereton dismissed claims the rides contravened a 1998 Plan of Management for the site or, therefore, the Crown Lands Act.

He also dismissed claims the park operator, Luna Park Sydney (LPS), and its parent company Metro Edgley had engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct.

The residents said they were led to believe the rides would not be located at the northern extension of the park.

"The 2001 DA (development application) and 2002 DA were not misleading or deceptive," Justice Brereton said.

LPS managing director Peter Hearne welcomed the court's decision, saying the amusement park was part of Sydney's heritage.

"It is unreasonable for people to move next door to a legally operating fun park and expect to change the way it operates," he said.

"The fact of the matter is Luna Park makes less noise than previous fun parks on the site and less noise than we ever said we would."

Mr Hearne said LPS had spent millions defending the action, and would apply for costs.

SMH (http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/locals-lose-battle-against-luna-park/2009/02/06/1233423495124.html)

I love it. lol

If only they would be able to bring the big dipper back to screw them over even more. If they don't like it they could always build noise barriers!

"It is unreasonable for people to move next door to a legally operating fun park and expect to change the way it operates," -- so true!

It was never going to be the same for Luna Park once the residents started moving into their million dollar units. If it was still all commercial it wouldnt be a problem.

Luna Park was there well before them, and thats a small price to pay for living there.

Such brilliant news. If only the park could operate at full active capacity again. I wish harry was still alive to witness this lost battle of his.

And he would probably have several heart attacks in the process.

Enjoy this report on Sartor and his battle with Rockdale Council

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnJRtFq-h9M&feature=subscription

Good report in yesterdays Sun Herald about NIMBY's and their ability to block developments.

From The Sun Herald (smh.com.au)

People power teams up to protect patches
Date: December 13 2009


Locals are using sophisticated tactics to stop unwanted projects, writes Paul Bibby.

Not so long ago, a big local campaign against an ugly block of flats or a multi-storey car park meant a petition, a few hundred objection letters and a story on the front page of the local paper.

If locals were particularly incensed, 50 or so might march down the main street to wave placards outside council chambers.

But people power has changed.

The State Government's takeover of some local planning powers and the growing influence of big developers has forced residents to adopt increasingly sophisticated strategies from the corporate world and federal politics to protect their patch.

Residents' action groups are carefully crafting their media message, coming up with sophisticated branding strategies and deliberately targeting marginal seats to pressure decision-makers at the big end of town. And the strategies appear to have worked.

From massive housing and coal-mining proposals in the Hunter Valley, to plans for a McDonald's in the inner-city, local action groups have forced the Government and councils into a string of back-downs this year.

''Watching these groups utilising social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter to raise awareness, and keep the community engaged in the campaign with regular text messages - it's a level of sophistication I've not seen before,'' said James Goodman from the Department of Social and Political Change at the University of Technology, Sydney. ''It's natural and normal for people now, which it wasn't five to 10 years ago.''

In Double Bay, residents defeated plans by the Ashington Group to build a 14-storey tower. Protesters used a slick campaign featuring professionally produced literature, a media strategy and a clutch of local celebrities.

The campaign mobilised about 1500 residents for a street protest - no mean feat in a suburb not known for its activism - pressuring the then planning minister Kristina Keneally to reject the proposal.

''Ashington was superbly done in terms of publicity,'' Save Our Suburbs president Tony Recsei said. ''You've got to latch on to certain emotional triggers that people will pick up on - that their freedom is impinged on, or that their way of life is under threat.''

The State Government's Part 3A planning powers and the establishment of Joint Regional Planning Panels, under which all but the smallest developments will be taken out of council hands, has prompted unprecedented co-operation between local campaigns.

A coalition of community and environment groups opposed to the expansion of mining in the Hunter Valley and the Central Coast defeated plans for a sand mine 260 metres from Somersby Public School.

And two months ago, thousands of residents from across Sydney and NSW took part in the Death of Democracy march to State Parliament to protest against the loss of local voices in planning and development decisions.

''Concentrating power in a single place creates a single target and for these groups the target has emerged as the NSW planning minister,'' Dr Goodman said.

''Connecting campaigns is the crucial step that groups have to take to translate a local issue to one that has power across a broader group. It allows people across the whole state to connect with their issues in a meaningful way.''

This coalition is now planning to take its fight directly to Macquarie Street - banding together to stand candidates against Labor in marginal seats at the next election.

''It's only if the politicians think that they're going to lose votes or lose face that they will act,'' Mr Recsei said.

But the activists say even the most sophisticated strategies will succeed only when combined with traditional campaign methods.

In Haberfield, residents gathered nearly 7000 signatures on petitions and 1000 objection letters against plans for a McDonald's restaurant, convincing Ashfield Council to reject the proposal.

''We canvassed every house in Haberfield, door-knocking, educating people about the fact that they could write objection letters and call the councillors,'' a campaign leader, Ilona Rabey, said. ''Whatever strategy you use, you have to make people realise that there is something they can do.''

NIMBYS ARE CUNTS

It depends on the type of project or development. I think we have to be careful on the types of NIMBY's we brand as troublemakers.

I ahd to laugh, the Age was talking about nukes in the Latrobe Valley and saying that LV people don't object to anything being built - there is a thread on here about people stopping a 4 story building in Traralgon. My a'sss they don't object!

So NO TO NIMBY!!!

Have your say in Sydney's NIMBY discussion board!

www.bangthetable.com