The Sydney Metro project represents a once in a generation opportunity to
critically evaluate how current, and shape how future, transport looks
Sydney.
Properly executed, the Metro will enable the necessary, but liveable,
density to be achieved to facilitate a growing city.
The current proposal does not achieve this.
Whilst acknowledging the need to increase population density,
particularly around transport corridors, this proposal tips that
balance far too in favour of development.
In very simple terms:
- the scale of the residential complex should be reduced
- the pro-rata car parking provision should be reduced - these folk
will be living on top of a train station!
- the opportunity to reduce the scale of the Pacific Highway through
Crows Nest and to return road space to public land doesn't appear to
have been given sufficient consideration.
It is also incomprehensible how a state government can be deploying a
state of the art metro system through one transport corridor, but at
the same time propose a 1950's solution in the form of a road to the
Northern Beaches.

I oppose this development. NSW citizens continue to have to deal with the
consequences of poor planning decisions. Principally, this is from
high-density residential development without appropriate
infrastructure to support it. The Crows Nest Metro Over Station
Development (OSD) is yet another example of this. The various
assessments conducted as part of this proposal should ring alarm
bells. For example, Appendix AA - Transport, Traffic and Pedestrian
Report states that because the development is on top of a railway
station it would have the effect of "minimising private vehicle
ownership
and trip generation" (page 7). Essentially, the assumption is that
people will use cars less because they can rely on public transport.
This is foolish. People in Sydney will continue to use cars to get
around, even for short trips. The report concedes (at page 65) that "a
significant number of trips each week are taken within North Sydney
LGA that are not commute to work trips" and OSD residents will still
"reasonably require" the use of a private vehicle for shopping and
other social activities. How does this analysis align with the idea
that private vehicle ownership will be minimised? It doesn't. The
mitigation measures proposed are inadequate. Clearly, setting up a
Metro doesn't solve Sydney's disjointed public transport system. The
public transport system is not integrated and it is still more
efficient to travel by car locally within the North Sydney LGA and to
a lot of broader destinations around Sydney. The analysis to support
the conclusion that there is unlikely to be adverse impacts on roadway
congestion is essentially the equivalent of wishful thinking. The
assumption that there will be a "minimising" effect on private vehicle
ownership underpins the reasoning that "Net traffic generated by the
site has been assessed as being less than that of existing land uses
on Crows Nest Station site. As such, modelling was not undertaken for
nearby intersections and the local road network" (page 7). In other
words, if the assumptions don't play out as imagined, we don't even
have any real evidence or insight into what the flow-on impacts will
be to nearby roadways. That is simply not good enough. The report uses
2016 census data (See page 64) to estimate private vehicle ownership
for OSD residents. The estimation for the OSD is significantly short
of the actual numbers for comparative dwellings in St Leonards (which
is just down the road). The plan is to deliberately provide "a minimal
number of parking spaces per apartment" to discourage vehicle
ownership. So again, if the imagined scenario isn't fulfilled, those
vehicles are going to flow-out into on-street parking. Congested
side-street parking is likely. It has happened all across Sydney.
Close scrutiny of this proposal shows that the assumptions on which it
is based are at best optimistic, but most likely flawed. The analysis
papers-over genuine risks that showed be approached with rigor. It's
yet another example of the 'she'll be right mate' approach to planning
that NSW residents have had to deal with. I sincerely hope that there
are people in power who genuinely want to make good decisions for the
good of the people. I hope that they want to base their decisions on
real evidence and proper holistic planning. I hope that they quash
this planning proposal until the planning is supported by robust
evidence and analysis that shows public amenities and public life will
not deteriorate as a result of proposed development.

I am opposed to the Sydney Metro Crows Nest Over Station Development. The
local areas at St Leonards and Crows Nest currently have very
insufficient parking for residents. This has a significant impact on
the residents' quality of life and ease of access to important
infrastructure such as bus stops, shopping centres and train stations.
The Over Station Development Plan did include Appendix AA_ CN OSD
Concept SSDA_ Transport Traffic and Pedestrian Assessment Report.
However, it is concerning that the Report did not model on the impact
the Over Station Development will have on parking and access to key
infrastructure. The stated intention of the Over Station Development
Plan was to improve employment prospects and improve access to
transport. The assumption of the Report was based on the premise that
new residents in the Over Station Development will not own vehicles
and will rely on existing or the Metro for travel. This is a highly
inaccurate assumption because no survey of the prospective new
residents was ever conducted and no intentions of vehicle ownership or
vehicle usage had ever been ascertained. It is appalling that the NSW
Government Department of Planning and Environment planned to approve
the Over Station Development on the basis that they believe the
inaccurate assumptions of the Transport Traffic and Pedestrian
Assessment Report. It highlights a gross oversight about the nature of
the Report's unsound research evidence, faulty methodology, fabricated
conclusions without any basis on facts and complete disregard for the
residents of St Leonards and Crows Nest. If the Over Station
Development is intended to improve employment opportunities, assist
sustainable population growth and access to transport links, then it
falls short of its stated purpose by a considerable measure. I will
urge the Minister to reconsider the Over Station Development and not
approve this Plan.

I am gravely concerned at the scale of residential development in this
plan and the absence of concrete proposals for providing the
commensurate infrastructure improvements required to meet residents'
needs and expectations for acceptable precinct amenity.
The plan seems to be deliberately opaque and disingenuous.
It proposes development to provide future jobs growth, matched with
additional residential options. The most cursory examination reveals
that, on the contrary, what is proposed is almost exclusively
apartment accomodation in massive high rise towers with negligible
commercial space. So are we to assume that the real intention is for
these residents to be housed in this area but commute out of area for
work?
The health precinct is already well established in St Leonards (which
is the subject of massive building at present) but the residences in
this plan are proposed for Crows Nest. What professions/enterprises is
the new job growth going to be in and where is it supposed to be
housed given the ridiculously low ratio for commercial v residential
in the plan.
Furthermore, the plan (sort of) pays reference to the need for
infrastructure improvements. Much is made of laneway design and road
setbacks but passing reference to schools, traffic management (because
let's be clear this many additional residents will bring more cars),
community services and shopping.
Also, the green space proposals are risible for the developments
proposed. If government really wants to encourage a healthy population
residing in areas of optimal amenity then it should be mandating as
much open space as possible.
Finally, the demand for this extra capacity may well be lessened by
events arising at the federal level. The Prime Minister has flagged
conducting discussions with the states on optimal levels of
immigration. Additionally, developers, who will find funding
increasingly challenging, will cut corners to optimise profits
resulting in sub-standard design and construction. Commentary
regarding standards for these two elements in the plan are
superficial.

I want see money provided from this development (State Infrastructure
Contribution Levy) for the expansion of Hume Park in Crows Nest. The
plan must ensure good pedestrian access around the development area
(as wide as possible footpaths - wider than currently exists with
overhead awnings for weather protection of pedestrians and it would be
good to have a walkthrough from the Pacific Highway to Hume Park. The
17 Storey building should be a commercial building NOT a hotel. A
commercial building will provide for more jobs. Ensure minimum
disruption of solar access to Hume Park.

My Submission.
I have red with interest the spin on the new development plans for the
Crows Nest Metro precinct.
SO MUCH SPIN much of this presenting this as a fait a compli.

I understand there are powerfull lobby groups pushing here for yet
more apartments.
Your spin presents this as a new commercial hub, when in fact it is
yest more piles of lucrative apartments .
A very low percentage is office space, currently at a premium in
Sydney at present
Let,s step back and have an honest look at this?

Is this visionary..... NO
Is this seriously building a workplace for the new Residents.....NO
Are the jobs above the Metro....NO

Suppose this "fail" is approved, then what next major buidings parks
and infrastructure will be needed and where will they go?
The stated aim to retain the Crows Nest Village will fail as it
inevitably becomes another Chatswood.

Please... TIME FOR A SERIOUS RE THINK
CONSULT PROPERLY WITH YOUR COMMUNITY
THERE ARE MANY LIFETIMES OF EXPERIENCE
AND EXPERISE OUT THERE.

MANY MINDS MAKE GREAT WORKS
AND THE COMMUNITY ALSO VOTES


TUDOR ANDERSON

There is a need for more enclosed parklands not tall towers.
The shadow over the existing park, which doesn't have as luscious
level grass as depicted in the illustration, will even more so be
overshadowed by those tall buildings. I'd hate to send my little one
to that childcare centre in the park as it wouldn't see the sunlight
at all, a point which isn't highlighted.
St Leonards has opened up more apartments, and North Sydney too. The
infrastructure for schooling has grown but it's still difficult to get
in to neighbouring schools. To make the place more liveable for the
existing and surrounding families (as Crows Nest is a place that other
neighbouring families visit), an enclosed park land, like those found
in London boroughs would fit in nicely with the community atmosphere
of Crows Nest. The Hume St park which is depicted in the illustration
is a sloping piece of land (not flat) and the Ernest St place is small
and not enclosed. I was looking forward to new parklands and gardens
in that location, not more towers. 27 levels is excessive and not in
keeping with the rest of Crows Nest. Whoever designed that doesn't
know the people. I hope you listen and amend the designs based on the
feedback. Even 17 levels is ridiculous. Crows Nest has to be the line
drawn for the community charm and some historical element. If you
proceed anyway, please keep any new building that have to be built to
the same level that was there before. Lets not knock everything down
either physically by buildings or to people's emotions by changing the
life of Crows Nest with monstrous buildings. Disappointing and not the
place where I've chosen to live. Please reassess.

I object to the concept plan for the overstation development ("OSD") at
the Crows Nest metro station site.

Th scale of the OSD is too high because it will cause unacceptable
overshadowing of surrounding areas, especially Willoughby Road.

The scale of the OSD is too great because it will cause unacceptable
traffic congestion. The OSD will provide accomodation for a large
number of people. However, the OSD provides inadequate access for
residents' cars. I predict most residents will drive their cars to and
from the OSD through streets to the east of the OSD. This area is
already somewhat congested, especially near Burlington Street. Extra
traffic will only matters worse.

The scale of the OSD is too great because it will set a precedent for
tall residential buildings south of Oxley Street. The current
strategic plan from North Sydney Council for the area south of the
intersection of Oxley Street and the Pacific Highway is for a scale of
buildings considerably lower than the 50 storey buildings proposed for
the area adjacent to St Leonards Station. A building of 27 storeys is
inconsistent with this plan.

I think buildings of a scale up to 15 storeys would be appropriate.
This scale would be an appropriate comparison for development south of
Hume Street which should be no more than 10 storeys, tapering down to
no more than 7 storeys at the intersection of Falcon Street and the
Pacific Highway.

I support the redevelopment of the Crows Nest metro site. However, I
think the proposed scale of the concept plan is too much.

Thanks,
John Fitzgerald

I have several objections to the proposal as follows:

I object in principle to the over-riding of Council planning controls
- and in particular I object to the inconsistency of this specific
proposal with North Sydney Council's `Placemaking and Principles Study
for Crows Nest'.

I object to the height and mass of the proposed buildings. Buildings
of this size are not needed to meet Crows Nest's requirements for
increased residential stock to meet Greater
Sydney Commission growth projections. The area is already ahead of the
2021 targets, plus has several large residential towers already
approved or under construction.

I object to the blatant attempt in the DRAFT St Leonards Crows Nest
Plan 2036 to create a high rise corridor down the Pacific Highway,
including this Metro Rezoning proposal. This
disregards the objective of protecting the `village atmosphere' of
Crows Nest and ruins any ability to transition from the tower
developments to the surrounding suburbs.

I object to the proposed bulk and scale of towers. This will become a
`precedent' for developers to `justify' the building of more
over-sized residential buildings in the area.

I object that the Government knows there is a need for at least one
new primary school and high school in this general area but has made
no real attempt to locate such a space. It
clearly does not intend to use the area above or adjacent to the
railway station for this purpose.

I object to the significant overshadowing effect from these proposed
buildings on to the surrounding streets, particularly from Five Ways
along Willoughby Road up to Ernest Place.
I further object to the catastrophic effect the development will have
on Hume Street Park which the Council has been improving and expanding
over the last decade.

The current proposed development is massively excessive, especially
combined with the proposed development between St Leonards Station and
Crows nest. Not to mention the seemingly likely South St Leonards
forest of apartment buildings.

That overly large number of new residents in such a confined area,
where there has already been substantial development over the last 10
years will turn the area into a monument to poor planing and over
development.

The Crows Nest station over development is definitely excessive, it
should have half the new floor area at most, or the 'village'
atmosphere of the area will be killed forever.