Comments made here were sent to Hornsby Shire Council. Add your own comment.
I oppose the proposed removal of so many trees. Manor Road itself and the land areas adjacent to the road are distinguished by mature trees and this environment would be forever ruined by such extensive felling. We need to preserve Hornsby's green areas and not allow developers to spoil our environment.
I am strongly opposed to over 70 trees being removed. This is a loss of living space and habitat for much wildlife. This is a huge loss for our shire and planet, not only a loss for me as it is my neighbouring plot. This DA is not in keeping with surrounding properties here which all have many trees and bushes. We need to ensure that our urban tree canopy is preserved. It will be a devastating loss and impossible to regenerate with the many plots being proposed. Too many trees are being destroyed for this.
Dear Council,
As per the above, I totally agree with the honesty and integrity of these statements.
Hornsby Shire has exceeded!!! the set state housing quota and the damage development has done to the area is irreparable and ruined the surrounding landscapes of Waitara and Asquith.
The West side of Hornsby needs to be left alone, and retained for its low rise and bush beauty. Did the Mayor not promise to return Hornsby to the bushland shire? I am yet to see any evidence of this in planning decisions.
Any further development on the Westside would be pure greed by Council and developers and it is time to stand by election promises and say enough is enough.
Keep the West Side low rise and bushy and retain heritage of the area.
I understand this site backs onto Berowra Valley and the DA involves the removal of 70 trees, many of them Indigenous and hollow bearing, which I would have thought to be protected given Mayor Ruddock's new tree preservation order to protect the decimated tree canopy in the Shire. That aside, the Flora and Fauna report refers to habitat for the Powerful Owl, a vulnerable species in NSW, so I request all action on this approval cease until a suitably qualified Powerful Owl expert can review the site in person and the necessary documents. Please also note that this DA was exhibited with no submission end date (due to a "system issue"?) and also over the Easter period, so I request that time be extended given the media that the DA received in The Hornsby Advocate on Thursday 29 March 2018 with thanks to CR Heyde and CR Tilbury.
I completely oppose any development and the removal of hollow bearing trees and other native vegetation stated in this development, as it would remove important trees and other flora used by native wildlife that live in this habitat. Any deliberate disturbance at this site, in which vulnerable top predators - the Powerful Owl - (and other species mentioned in the Flora and Fauna Assessment ) forage and live, is nothing short of irresponsible and careless. I hope the council decides in a manner that shows strong leadership towards maintaining a balanced approach to environmental impact and not only consider revenue that is being generated by a development, its associated fees and ongoing council rate charges payable.
Thank you for the consideration.
I am opposed to the proposed removal of so many trees on the property. More needs to be done to protect our trees, particularly when they comprise native vegetation/fauna habitat and are contiguous to a national park, such as in this case. Hornsby is extremely fortunate to have the number of trees that it does, but the constant developments, subdivisions and APZ requirements are taking a huge toll on our trees and native vegetation. Council should not approve developments where such a massive impact is sustained to a local occurrence of trees/native vegetation, especially if there is no offsetting. Can the applicant please revise the proposal to reduce the impact on the natural environment.
I am strongly apposed to the removal of these trees at this development site some of which contain hollows which are essential habitat for parrots, owls and gliders and other native animals. The tall mature trees contribute to the natural values of the area which is distinguished by its many canopy covering mature trees. In addition, an old Blackbutt on the site has a large old scar at its base which needs to be expertly examined for aboriginal heritage values. In view of Mayor Ruddock's revised tree preservation order to protect our decimated tree canopy this will be a test to fulfill these new orders. I consider that this 7 lot proposal be approved for a subdivision of 2 lots only requiring that no significant native trees need be removed. Enough of our beautiful old trees have unnecessarily been removed.
I object to this application and agree and support the points raised by other citizens who live in the Bushland Shire. The destruction of our bushland environment and the rapid change to our suburbs is a concern and disappointing as we loose the essence of why we have chosen to live in such a beautiful part of the world. This development, if not managed correctly will be another destructive step that diminishes the Bushland Shire.
I am opposed to the development Application for the following reasons:
1. The development requires the removal of 0.81 hectares of vegetation that has been identified as potentially containing 43 threatened species but this has not been properly investigated. Hence there are inadequate details on required offsets under the Biodiversity Conservation Act. Suitable offsets may not even be available. Indeed is it legal to clear the land under the Act?
2. The tree clearance is not in accordance with the new Tree Preservation Order.
3. The requirement to apply Asset Protection Zones using land that is not part of the development is not acceptable
4. Lot 4 includes land that is currently zoned as RE1 and the proposed development is not permitted on this land
5. Some of the required tree removal is on the land currently zoned as RE1 but clearing is not consistent with the objectives of this zoning.
6. The subdivision is located on a high ridge surrounded by steep land over 18%. This topography would make the development have an unacceptably high bushfire risk and yet there is access via only one road
7. The development will be detrimental to the integrity of the adjoining Berowra Valey National Park
