From the Council Chamber May 20, 2025
By Pittwater Greens councillor Miranda Korzy
The state government’s development push is having a big impact on council, with staff already dealing with development applications under the new Low and Mid-Rise Density rules. Although only one DA has been submitted for Pittwater Ward so far, Mona Vale residents have told me that developers have been knocking on their doors. With thousands more home owners and tenants likely to move to Mona Vale under the reforms, I called at this week’s council meeting for the Mona Vale Place Plan to be completed, to ensure we have an attractive and functional town centre to serve all residents.
Also on the agenda were a number of policies up for review, including Land Dealings, Memorials, and Climate Change - all going on exhibition. And as this week’s extraordinary rain and flooding reminds us of the impact of increasing global temperatures, councillors also voted to develop plans for electric vehicle parking stations across the Northern Beaches.
New council measures to control increased density
We know there will be big changes to the character of large parts of the Northern Beach under the state government’s new density rules, allowing new types of housing that aren’t permitted under current Local Environment Plans - or the NBC draft that was submitted to the NSW Planning department last year.
Here’s a recap of what’s coming. Council planning staff said in Tuesday’s meeting papers that the new regime will apply to more than 16,000 lots across the LGA, with 5,174 permitting dual occupancy developments in the former Warringah area.
In Mona Vale and eight other town centres identified by the NSW Labor government (namely, Balgowlah Stocklands, Dee Why, Forestville, Forestway Shopping Centre, Frenchs Forest, Manly, Manly Vale, and Warringah Mall), another 11,000 lots have also effectively been rezoned as follows:
- residential flat buildings and shop-top housing up to 22-24m (6 storeys) are now permitted in R3 zones within 400m of each town centre;
- residential flat buildings up to 17.5m (4 storeys) are now permitted in R3 zones between 400 - 800m from each town centre
- residential flat buildings, multi-dwelling housing (attached dwellings, townhouses and terraces) and dual occupancies up to height 9.5m (2-3 storeys) are now permitted in the R1 General Residential and R2 Low Density Residential zones within 800m from each town centre.
Under the changes, mandatory building heights, floor space ratios, lot sizes and widths apply however, staff brought a set of proposals for new controls to be added to existing Development Control Plans (DCPs) “to guide the preparation and assessment of development applications for proposed developments that can now be carried out due to the LMR Reforms”.
Changes have been proposed for the Manly, Warringah and Pittwater DCPs (p.70), which remain active until the new Northern Beaches LEP and DCP are finalised, although unfortunately, DCPs are not binding. And staff said at the meeting they will not include any provisions for affordable housing.
For the Pittwater DCP, they have proposed a new section with “Design Criteria for Low and Mid-Rise Housing Areas - applying to land zoned R2 and R3, within 800 metres walk of the Mona Vale town centre. It covers issues such as site layout, setbacks and height (number of storeys), building and landscape design, parking design and vehicle access.
At the meeting, Manly Good for Manly councillor Candy Bingham asked staff how much it would cost developers to abide by the proposed changes to the DCPs. Staff responded that: “I don’t think it will impact developers ability to develop.”
All councillors voted to place the amendments on exhibition except Mayor Sue Heins (a Frenchs Forest Your Northern Beaches councillor) and Narrabeen independent councillor Vincent De Luca.
The proposal is now open for public comment at: HERE
Mona Vale Place Plan report likely by July 1
Mona Vale residents have asked me numerous times over the last year and more recently when the Mona Vale Place Plan will be finalised. It stalled in 2024 when staff said they needed to carry out a traffic study for the area and later, with notice of the Low and Medium-rise housing reforms, it was further delayed. I believe it is imperative, with those reforms, that the Mona Vale Place Plan proceeds. One local planner (non-councillor) estimates the changes will bring another 8,000 residents to live in Mona Vale, which will change the dynamics of the village, impacting work already carried out on the place plan.
To that end, I’ve been talking to staff in recent months about work recommencing. Two weeks ago, they told me that they were reviewing work carried out so far and were preparing to brief councillors on it.
It appears a number of other councillors have also been concerned about the impact of the changes for town centres in their wards, with Manly YNB councillor Sarah Grattan proposing a motion at last week’s meeting for reports into the viability of developing place plans for Manly Vale and Forestville. Pittwater YNB councillor Rowie Dillon and I had intended putting a similar motion up for Mona Vale once we’d had a briefing. Curl Curl Greens councillor Kristyn Glanville suggested before the meeting broadening the motion to consider all nine centres affected by the reforms and so she, Ms Dillon and I amended the motion to do that, formalising our request for a briefing on Mona Vale as soon as possible.
Ms Grattan said she had been working with residents since 2017 towards creating a centre for Manly Vale, and now with the LMR reforms and a DA submitted by McDonalds for the shopping strip (which has been strongly opposed by residents), it was urgent to develop a place plan. The situation was similar for Forestville, she said.
Arguing that Mona Vale should be the top priority given that residents there had been promised a place plan since 2013, I said the government imposed density increase would create demands on all kinds of local infrastructure in town centres over coming years. This would include the need for improved roads, footpaths, cycleways and parking, cultural, entertainment and sports facilities, creating attractive community meeting places and encouraging the growth of valued local shops and businesses. At the same time, it would require a determined effort to retain trees and parks (or in some cases develop new ones), to provide an attractive and healthy environment.
Staff acknowledged at the meeting that they had committed to coming back to councillors with a briefing on the Mona Vale Place Plan, tentatively on July 1.
“The reason for Mona Vale being briefed more quickly is that’s a project that’s in train at the moment,” staff told the meeting.
Councillors voted unanimously for the motion.
History of the Mona Vale Place Plan
Pittwater councillors resolved to develop a place plan for Mona Vale in 2013, and that council undertook extensive engagement and research for it starting in 2014.
It was scheduled to go to council for exhibition, as it turned out, days after the council amalgamation in May 2016. A revised version was exhibited later that year and received extensive opposition due to an extra two storeys added on top of the previously proposed four storeys. The then Northern Beaches Council Administrator Dick Persson at that point dropped the plan.
NBC later commenced consultation towards a new MV Plan Plan in 2022, but once again work paused in 2024, to carry out a traffic study and whilst staff awaited the government’s LMRH changes.
Land dealings policy - will this protect community land?
Residents are invited to comment on the council’s draft Land Dealings Policy, which councillors voted to place on public exhibition at Tuesday’s meeting.
This short policy (only three pages long) aims to ensure council land dealings are carried out “transparently, accountably, and in the best interests of the community”.
A number of criteria already existed for review of our land assets: their purpose; usability; viability; and overall community benefit. To these Ms Glanville proposed adding “environmental value”. She also suggested a rider be added that any purchaser of council land should be encouraged to retain trees on that land in any future redevelopment.
In response to a question, staff said Ms Glanville’s proposed amendment could reduce the value of the land.
The amendment was then lost, with only Frenchs Forest Greens councillor Ethan Hrnjak, Curl Curl YNB councillor Joelene Hackman, Ms Glanville, Manly Greens councillor Bonnie Harvey and myself supporting it.
The original motion then passed unanimously.
To comment on the policy see: yoursay.northernbeaches.nsw.gov.au/draft-land-dealings-policy
Developer to fund creek rehabilitation at Warriewood
The developer of the Foley’s nursery land at Warriewood will be required to rehabilitate the adjoining section of Narrabeen Creek and pass it to council as part of a planning agreement approved by council on Tuesday night.
A planning agreement, “is a legal arrangement made between a developer/land owner and council to facilitate the delivery of a public benefit”, staff explained in the council papers.
The Land and Environment Court approved the development in November last year, on condition that the developer Warrimac Pty Ltd would enter into a planning agreement with the council.
Under the agreement, the developer will, at no cost to the council, be required to rehabilitate the creek and hand over to council the creek line corridor as well as a shared path along Brands Lane, from Narrabeen Creek to Macpherson St, once the work is done.
The work should ensure waters from a one in 100 year flood would be contained within the creek and enhance the biodiversity of the waterways corridor.
However, staff noted that the developer does not yet own the site.
Staff placed the draft agreement on public exhibition during March and April and received eight responses, five in support. One of these said that the agreement ”provides the missing link for Narrabeen Creek, including a path connecting to surrounding paths and necessary rehabilitation works in the creek”.
The two opposing submissions referred to traffic congestion and parking problems, but staff said these related to the actual DA (which had been approved by the court) rather than the planning proposal.
The proposal was passed by exclusion - meaning in a block of other motions that councillors did not call out for discussion at the meeting.
Does our Climate Change Policy measure up?
Climate change mitigation and adaption will be at the forefront of many residents’ minds after the intense rainfall of the last week - and council staff have somewhat co-incidentally reviewed our existing policy dealing with these issues. This new draft Climate Change Policy came to council on Tuesday night.
The policy takes into account the large range of climate change risks that scientists expect will increase in future years. The staff report notes these are identified in the NSW State Disaster Mitigation Plan as: “increasingly severe and complex impacts associated with coastal hazards and flooding, and more frequent extreme weather, bushfires, high winds, heat waves and droughts”.
The proposed policy would replace five related policies from the Northern Beaches’ previous councils and again, as a high level document, is only short - five pages long. It commits the council to: adopting a proactive and adaptive approach; ensuring that this is incorporated across all facets of the council’s operations and services; making sure greenhouse gas targets remain current; working with the community to reduce emissions; identifying and managing climate change risks across councils’ responsibilities; and considering options for existing developments and land uses that could be impacted by climate change.
The proposal, to place the policy on public exhibition, was moved by Ms Hackman, who accepted an addition from Ms Glanville, that:
“Council hold a special interest workshop for Councillors in September 2025 regarding the Northern Beaches Climate Change Action Plan, to discuss the gaps, opportunities, and strategic direction of the next revision for that action plan.”
Ms Glanville said that a lot of councillors and members of the community had ideas they would like incorporated in the revised action plan - which builds on the principles contained in the policy.
Ms Hackman welcomed the addition, and the item was passed by all councillors except Mr De Luca.
You can comment on the policy at: yoursay.northernbeaches.nsw.gov.au/climate-change-policy-draft
Planning for electric vehicle charging stations
In a similar vein, staff brought a proposal to council on Tuesday to review electric vehicle charging stations on the Northern Beaches. Prompted by a motion in February to identify the gaps in access to this infrastructure across the LGA, staff noted advice from the NSW Climate Change and Energy department (based on CSIRO data) that the LGA has a significant need for both public and private EV chargers.
Tuesday’s report identified locations and types of charges across the Northern Beaches. In Pittwater ward, staff said publicly available chargers (ie not on private land, in malls or in-house) can currently be found at: Pittwater South carpark, at Palm Beach; at Dearin Reserve, Newport; Bungan St and Village Park carpark, Mona Vale; and Yulong Rd, Terrey Hills. Chargers are also available at Lagoon St, Ocean St, and Berry Reserve car park, Narrabeen.
Given the EV market and chargers are rapidly changing, staff recommended a review of the council’s current EV Charging Infrastructure Plan and that future charging infrastructure be procured via an Expression of Interest.
Staff said at the meeting that one of the providers’, Jolt, has an existing contract with the council that would not be affected by the proposal for an EOI. Asked by Frenchs Forest Greens Councillor Ethan Hrnjak if criteria for selecting future infrastructure would include public amenity (such as the impact of advertising on charging stations), staff said “Non-financial factors are often part of criteria for tenders”.
Ms Grattan also pointed out that EV chargers need to be available for residents living in apartments, should they own electric vehicles.
The motion was supported by all councillors except: Pittwater independent Mandeep Singh, and Narrabeen independents Vince De Luca and Bob Giltinan.
Memorials and naming honours - what do you think?
The question of how we honour residents on the Northern Beaches, whether they’ve made a major contribution to our community, or simply been well loved by their family and friends, arose at Tuesday night’s council meeting.
This sensitive topic is becoming a pressing issue, because as staff said in the meeting papers, we now have more than 700 memorials (the vast majority seats with memorial plaques) on council land across the Northern Beaches. And the council receives more than 70 requests for new ones each year. Most ask for cliff top reserves or coastal locations, but the majority of these sites are at capacity.
In what I believe is a fitting recognition of the value our community places on the environment, staff have recommended that memorials should normally take the form of a tree, sympathetic to the location. The newly planted trees would not be accompanied by a plaque unless voted for by councillors.
Meanwhile, memorial seats would only be considered in places where the need for a seat is identified.
Also under the policy, geographical features would be named using historical or Aboriginal words, as well as local species of plants, birds and animals. Locality and geographic names would be first preference for sportsgrounds and major venues, to help those travelling to and trying to find them. Similarly for buildings and infrastructure at these sites.
“Individuals nominated in a naming proposal must have had a long-term association with the area and made a highly significant contribution,” the policy states. These include 20 or more years association with a local community group/club, or protection, restoration or enhancement of an area.
However, proposals to recognise politicians of any kind would only be progressed with a vote by council.
The draft also indicates that only those who are no longer living should be honoured with a memorial. Staff told the meeting that they had received regular feedback since 2019 supporting this position and that it was consistent with the Geographical Names Board position.
“Memorialising someone who is still alive would be inconsistent,” a staff member told the meeting.
Whilst this might be controversial for some people, I was a member of the council’s Places for People Strategic Reference Group during the council’s first term, where the issue was discussed and most members supported this approach. It occurred soon after the national debate in 2020 about whether or not the Margaret Court Arena in Melbourne should be renamed due to her vilification of LGBTQI people.
I support the policy in full, because of its alignment with these discussions at the SRV.
“We now have a proliferation of plaques across the Northern Beaches, especially on seats, and are running out of space for them and sites to dedicate to individuals,” I told the meeting.
“We also have renamed sites (for example rockpools) that were previously known by their geographical name, which residents have continued to use - because nobody remembers the official name and it’s easier if you’re trying to work out where you’re going to have a geographic location.”
All councillors voted to exhibit the draft policy except Mr De Luca.
To comment on it, see: yoursay.northernbeaches.nsw.gov.au/memorials-and-naming-honours-policy
Call for transparency over changes at Freshwater Senior Campus
The plans of some Pittwater students and parents will have been disrupted by the NSW government announcement last December that Freshwater Senior Campus is to transition to a fully comprehensive high school accepting years 7 to 10 from next year. Whilst this has now been delayed, many in the community have been calling for more details about plans for the school, and students took to the streets to protest in February.
In response to the government announcement, Manly Greens councillor Bonnie Harvey, a former “Freshie” student, brought a motion to last Tuesday’s meeting, calling for the NSW Education department to carry out community and council consultation on the proposed building required to expand the Freshwater Senior Campus. She also called for a halt to the decision until more information is publicly available - regarding the transition and its consequences for transport, the environment, nearby residents, and students.
Although this is largely a state government issue, I’m going to address the issue in detail here because of its impact on local schooling.
Ms Harvey told the meeting that the campus, one of five belonging to Northern Beaches Secondary College, hosts only year 11 and 12 students and has a stable enrolment of 650 students.
“Freshwater’s composition fosters a mature learning environment and allows students to choose from over 80 subjects, including academically challenging HSC subjects and TAFE courses,” she said in her background to the motion.
“It is ranked as one of the top non-selective public high schools in the state.
“In April 2024, the NSW Department of Education (DoE) published a media release titled ‘Everyone wants to be at Freshie’.”
Community consultation on the issue had consisted of an opt-in survey conducted by the department over four weeks, which could be completed multiple times, she said. It excluded households enrolled in private schools and consulted twice as many pre-school and primary school stakeholders as those from senior schools.
The preferred outcome of the senior school community respondents was to change the intake areas, which had since occurred, she said.
“Many respondents also questioned the need for the school’s change, regarding its success; this was not reflected in the report,” she said.
“The announcement was met with large opposition from parents, current students and Freshwater alumni. Former principal, Frank Pickardt described the decision as a ‘tragedy’.”
During the Public Address session at the start of the meeting, current Freshwater student Sophie Steele and P&C president Sam Williams also spoke against the change.
During debate, Curl Curl YNB councillor Nicholas Beaugard said “council can’t change what the Education Department does” but it could represent the strong views of the community. Whilst he had been committed to comprehensive high schools in the past, he believed there was a demand for choice in education and his opinion had been changed by his daughter who attended the school.
However, Narrabeen YNB councillor Ruth Robins made an impressive speech, having researched the issue with local schools both secondary and primary. Ms Robins had discovered that Narrabeen High lost approximately 35 Year 11 students to Freshwater last year and approximately 40 the year before. The Barrenjoey school community lost approximately 30 Year 11 students in 2023.
“Losing band 5/6 students has a huge impact to these school communities in areas of subject restriction and curriculum, staff retention (it’s a cruel cycle – as a Principal explained to me - if you don’t have the students you can’t offer the subjects),” Ms Robins told the meeting.
“If subjects aren’t offered then staff leave to teach them where they can; it impacts the culture of learning and to me most importantly the school community have a huge leadership and mentoring vacuum.”
Whilst I supported the motion, believing that students, parents and teachers deserve proper transparency and to be properly informed about the decision, I concurred with Ms Robins comments.
All students deserved a high quality education, including the exceptional range of courses offered at Freshwater, the welfare programs and kind community (which were both mentioned by Ms Steele) and an environment where teachers are respected, I told the meeting.
Having spent many years on both local and the district P&C, the problems with students living close to Freshwater having to travel long distances to high school was long standing, I said.
However, I believed that rather than scrapping the Freshwater model, it should be extended to all students. In Canberra, those in Years 11 and 12 attended senior colleges, which opened up these opportunities to all.
The motion was supported by all councillors except Ms Robins.
In brief:
Landlords expected to provide tenants with one parking permits
Councillors voted to adopt once again the current Parking Permit Policy, updated to say that: where a ratepayer is a landlord, it is expected that at least one of their permits will be provided to their tenant; and that tenants would be encouraged to request at least one permit be provided in their rental agreement.
Election signs review
Ms Bingham called for a briefing to councillors within six months on policy options for Council management of election signs. This followed a significant increase in the number erected across the LGA in the lead up to the recent federal election and community concerns about their visual impact.
Land donated to council in Avalon
The council voted in confidential session to accept a resident’s generous offer of an environmentally sensitive block of land for public space in Avalon at no cost, except for those of the owner incurred for the legal transfer.
The council will formally thank the landowner for the proposed donation, acknowledging the significant contribution it makes to enhancing the connectivity and habitat values of the surrounding wildlife corridor and supporting long-term community and environmental outcomes.
Following the proposed transfer, the council will take the appropriate steps to classify the block as community land and rezone it to open space.
No other details are currently available, in accordance with the wishes of the person transferring the land to Council.
Cr. Ruth Robins speech in support of comprehensive public high schools
Thank you to the speakers/students and Freshwater community for taking the time coming tonight. It’s great to have youth and their passion in the audience.
I’ve spoken at length this week to the Principals of North Narrabeen Primary School and Narrabeen Sports High School.
Also, last August I spoke at length to the Director, Pittwater Principal’s Network, on how these changes will affect our school communities.
I understand from these conversations the NSW Education Dept has, as one of its main strategies ‘that every student have access to co-educational options.’
The Education Dept also sees high schools with years 7-12 as one of the strategies in the way forward in ‘providing every student with outstanding education ….’
From this I believe that the proposed changes are part of State Government Strategy and not an issue Council should be involved in …
However, clearly this proposed changed does impact a section of our community – hence the Notice of Motion.
I represent the Narrabeen Ward – representing the public schools of Narrabeen Sports High and Cromer High Schol. We have 2 public high schools in the Pittwater Ward – Barrenjoey and Pittwater.
I was informed the Principals of these 4 Public High Schools are all in alignment and support the Department’s initiative of years 7-12 for high schools and their Co-ed Strategy.
I also understand that the P&C Presidents of Barrenjoey, Pittwater, Cromer and Narrabeen High Schools are all aligned in their support with the above – no doubt all have the future of our young people in mind in their support!
Last year the Narrabeen school community lost approximately 35 year 11 students to Freshwater and approximately 40 students to Freshie the year before.
The Barrenjoey school community lost approximately 30 Year 11 students the year before.
Losing band 5/6 students has a huge impact to these school communities in areas of subject restriction and curriculum, staff retention (it’s a cruel cycle – as a Principal explained to me - if you don’t have the students you can’t offer the subjects) if subjects aren’t offered then staff leave to teach them where they can; it impacts the culture of learning and to me most importantly the school community have a huge leadership and mentoring vacuum.
My conversation with my local school Principals have informed me of the benefits of the Department of Education’s initiatives in both Narrabeen and Pittwater Ward and therefore I cannot support this motion.