230 Vic Rd + GSV + Amalgamation & ribbons + Gutters

230 Victoria Rd; Gladesville Shopping Village; Amalgamation and Ribbons; Gutters


Hi everyone,

Please see below updates on a number of issues since we were last in touch.
LDA2015/0433 – 230 Victoria Road, Gladesville

Ryde Council has received a DA for a 7-storey development to replace the building on the corner of Victoria Rd and Jordan St (you may think of it as the “Consulere” building as it was once named, or for NRMA being in there, or the State member’s office). The plans (links are at the bottom of this section) specify the height and the Floor Space Ratio (FSR) at levels that are compliant with Ryde Council’s Local Environmental Plan.

Of great concern is the change in use from being commercial to being mainly residential, with 100 units above a smaller amount of commercial space. With all of the developments going on in Gladesville, with the Local Environmental Plans of both Ryde and Hunters Hill Councils concentrating a large increase in building heights along the Victoria Rd corridor in Gladesville, we are right to be concerned about the cumulative impact on parking and traffic management. Without access to/from Victoria Rd or Jordan St, this DA seeks to direct all vehicular access along Gerard Lane, a small lane for the levels of vehicular movements that should be expected at peak times in a 100 unit complex.

We have seen no integrated report about managing the foreseeable cumulative impact as developer’s build to the maxima allowed under both Councils’ planning instruments, but rather each DA states that its impact in isolation will not be significant. Cumulative impact is what matters.

The change in use of this building would exacerbate the peak traffic flows and parking demand of residences, of which there are so many others being built or planned to come to Gladesville. Having a mix of residential and commercial floor space protects Gladesville from being a ghost-town during the day; but saturating parking and locking up streets with all vehicles moving out of the multi-story developments in the morning and coming back in the evening. The removal of commercial space would adversely impact day-time demand for local businesses. Being 100 units, the developer is entitled to apply to the Foreign Investment Review Board for approval to sell 100% of these units to foreign buyers.

This DA will be assessed by the state government’s Joint Regional Planning Panel made up of 3 state government appointees and 2 local council representatives. It can also receive a recommendation from Council, after Council’s review of the plans.

We encourage you to make a submission to Ryde Council urging them not to support this Development Application, because of its impact on: parking, traffic, the local economy, and doing little for housing affordability with potentially 100% of units going to foreign buyers, and anything else that matters to you – if you feel that way about it. We also recommend joining Nabo (a useful website for local communities to share information and promote common interest) and following Ros T’s posts, such as https://www.nabo.com.au/group/5600c1c6e7ec617b088b4568.

Submissions are due by 21st October 2015 (after an extension granted by Ryde Council, for which we are grateful), and can be sent to cityofryde@ryde.nsw.gov.au. If you would like to copy the Councillors, their email addresses are: dpendleton@ryde.nsw.gov.aurmaggio@ryde.nsw.gov.au ; bpickering@ryde.nsw.gov.ausarkis@yedelian.com ; salvestro-martin@ryde.nsw.gov.aucchung@ryde.nsw.gov.au ; artine@ryde.nsw.gov.augsimon@ryde.nsw.gov.au ; jli@ryde.nsw.gov.au ; JStott@ryde.nsw.gov.autperram@ryde.nsw.gov.au ; mayor@ryde.nsw.gov.au

Please click here for the DA plan files http://gladesvillecommunity.com/230vic.html

GSV – Exhibition of concept 3

A few months ago we saw the 3rd proposed concept from the developer. We appreciate the meaningful consultation as the applicant is exhibiting to the public in advance, transparently, and we have time to consider what is coming. We also appreciate the higher quality work from the consultants and architectural merit in the design.

However, we cannot support a development that seeks to exceed the Floor Space Ratio limit from the Local Environmental Plan (LEP) – by application to the NSW Government (with or without the support of Hunters Hill Council). Any additional bulk/scale would exacerbate the adverse impacts on the local community, and we don’t think that can be effectively offset by design quality. The consultants put forward an interesting discussion on height. We should remain open to discussion on amendment of height by way of redistribution across the site if the net impact is favourable to the Community. To be clear, we would all prefer a smaller development, but we are starting from the position of Hunters Hill Council’s LEP – which allows the height and Floor Space Ratio (FSR) that accommodated the first DA in 2013. The DA in 2013 did not fail because it was too big, despite that being the almost-universal response from the community. It failed for other reasons.

The assessment from Architectus did not recommend withdrawal because of height and bulk, and we should not ever think that withdrawal of that DA means we will not get a development of that size. The height and size of the first DA is our staring point, because Hunters Hill Council’s planning instruments allow it. From this starting position, we believe that it is sensible to discuss net improvement to the amenity of the community if a redistribution of height can achieve that. The 25 storey tower of Concept 2, and the 15/16 storeys of the concept 3 that was recently exhibited, though, were a combination of redistribution of height AND an increase in FSR – which is why the taller towers were so high.

With the lack of frontage to Victoria Rd, the cumulative impact of all of the developments hitting Gladesville, and the widespread outrage at the size of the first DA which was supported by Hunters Hill Council’s LEP, we think it would be reckless to indulge any plan to increase FSR on the site. No increase in FSR should be supported.

Above does not even contemplate the treatment of the timber cottage at 10 Cowell Street, for which Hunters Hill Council has still not finalised the Heritage listing  failing to complete a process that stalled in 2012.

As always, we are grateful to the Hunters Hill Trust for their excellent response, far more eloquent than we could articulate the very reasonable position. The summary and the full submission are available here http://huntershilltrust.org.au/2015/08/latest-proposal-for-gladesville-shops-even-worse/


The foreseeable flow of DA’s into Ryde and Hunters Hill Councils, to develop Gladesville to the LEP maxima increase the importance of a coordinated plan to manage the future of our suburb, and give us strong reason to question the merit of the Joint Regional Authority response to which these Councils (and Lane Cove) are committed. Councils are spending tens of thousands of dollars of our money running ads to tell us and the state government that the JRA is what we want. More accurately, survey respondents opted for a “superior alternative” which is preferable as a matter of definition, it is our Councils that have nominated the JRA as the FORM of the “superior alternative”, and we had no real opportunity to have our own opinions heard. Under the JRA concept, the 3 Councils would collaborate on planning, and make strategic decisions by unanimous agreement of their respective representatives.

Quite how this JRA structure, with a long list of issues on which to achieve consensus, would leave us better off than a smaller amalgamation in which Gladesville sits entirely within one municipality, is a question for which we see no sensible answer. As it stands, we can’t get Ryde and Hunters Hill Councils to commit to a joint study to model the cumulative impact on traffic and parking of all of these developments being assessed by each Council, independently. If they can’t agree to that, now, how can we expect them to achieve timely agreement on planning issues when there are other initiatives competing for consensus agreement. Further information is available in our submission to IPART, available here http://gladesvillecommunity.com/fftf%20submission.html.

In 2003 many residents of Gladesville put balloons on the front of their homes to show that they wanted Hunters Hill Council to be protected from amalgamation with Ryde. After Hunters Hill Council entered into option deeds (like contracts) for the sale of public land (including the timber cottage at 10 Cowell St, without heritage protection) to the owner who wants to redevelop the Gladesville Shopping Village, and had developed planning instruments to allow the 8 storey towers on the site, many of us feel betrayed. The fact that Council entered into the option deeds before actually answering its outstanding question of whether 10 Cowell St should get heritage listing in the Local Environmental Plan (as it was listed in the draft of the 2012 LEP that was publicly exhibited), and that there was no prior consultation and no public tender, and that it left no mechanism (without exposure to being sued for damages) to refuse the sale if the developer wants to pursue state government approval to ignore local planning instruments (like going up to 26 storeys), we’re outraged.

This time the councils and their supporters are encouraging us to display ribbons, but there probably won’t be many ribbons being flown in Gladesville. In fact, we’ve received a disappointing report of ribbons being tied to a front fence without the home-owner’s consent. If you or someone you know has had ribbons tied to your fence or tree, and you’d like our help – just let us know and we’ll get someone over there to cut down those misleading ribbons that purport to speak for your opinion.

You might remember our survey into Gladesville residents’ satisfaction with local council performance, results of which were posted here http://gladesvillecommunity.com/survey%20results.html

We welcome suggestions of how dissenting residents might like to be heard. One interesting suggestion was to stop mowing the nature strip / grass verge, saying that if the Council doesn’t look after us we shouldn’t look after their grass.

Gutters – can be used to get water from the street into the storm-water drains

If you haven’t seen the videos, here’s how a gutter was recently poured in a part of Gladesville under Hunters Hill Council’s control. An affected home-owner requested permission to address Hunters Hill Council on the matter but the Mayor refused the request. The home-owner has requested details such as plans/specifications, how the gutter heights were specified to the contractor, what inspection was undertaken before the concrete pour, etc from Hunters Hill Council – and is still waiting answers after 3 & ½ weeks.

Hunters Hill Council’s website and email auto-signatures identify Excellence and Accountability as two of Council’s values, which are apparently at the heart of everything that Hunters Hill Council does.


Register to receive our emails

Feel free to share our emails with your friends who are interested in local affairs, and encourage them to register to receive emails directly, here http://gladesvillecommunity.com/register.html

– Team and Gladesville Community Group (Incorporated)