KU-RING-GAI COUNCIL HERITAGE REFERENCE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 5 JUNE 2025

Chairperson: Councillor K Wheatley (Wahroonga Ward)
Deputy Chairperson: Councillor I Balachandran (Gordon Ward)
Mr Robert Moore – National Trust
Ms Lorna Watt – Ku-ring-gai Historical Society
Ms Margaret Skilbeck – Australian Institute of Architects
Mr Chris Bluett- Community Member

Heritage strategy ongoing projects update

Heritage strategy ongoing projects update

The Heritage Reference Committee noted and discussed the reported strategic heritage projects updates. Particular comments are noted as follows.


NSW heritage strategy – The committee noted that this needed to give more attention to the majority and diversity of NSW heritage, including the conservation of heritage conservation areas and the setting or context of heritage items, particularly in relation to state housing policy. Council staff will circulate the draft Council submission to members for comments.


Modern study – The AIA member requested to review the draft inventories for identifying those on the AIA register.


Park signs – The committee requested the draft list of parks for potential signs.
Council staff will circulate the list.


St Ives WWII relief map – The committee supports the intention for conservation and seeking a Federal grant.


RESOLVED:
The Heritage Reference Committee received and noted this report and provided comments.

Heritage item delisting and SSDs

The Chair and Deputy Chair raised questions for the committee on these matters.


The Chair questioned whether the Committee would support a recommendation for the Minister for Planning to delist “stranded” heritage items, and associated risks of lowering the delisting threshold driven by development or politics rather than sound heritage principles and the ongoing implications for future generations. The Committee was further asked about appropriate measures to prevent inappropriate delisting, whether Council should retain a role in local heritage decisions, and how delisting consideration could be strictly limited to current heritage item owners during the TOD implementation.


Committee members did not support the transfer of local delisting powers to the Minister for Planning. The Committee highlighted the risk of a precedent endangering the future of heritage items and heritage conservation areas if delisting is driven by development or politics rather than heritage significance. The Committee affirmed the need to retain local heritage decisions with the local community, noting existing listings are derived from consultation with the local community about local significance, and advised that delisting requires presentation of legitimate reasons relating to heritage significance. Members commented that, while there is no shortcut for listing or delisting that follow the same planning process, owners can lodge a development application to demolish a heritage item with supporting justification that is then considered on its merits by the consent authority.

The Deputy Chair raised concerns about the impact of context changes to heritage items and sought the Committee advice on guidance for any exceptional process available for items “marooned” by state significant development (SSD).


The Committee noted there is no available exceptional process. The Committee noted its preference for zoning and development standards that are compatible with heritage items. The Committee noted Council’s proposed alternative for transferrable development, and the option for master planning for case-by-case design around heritage items. The Committee noted the issue of disparity of scale when surrounding development dwarfs heritage items and the limits for design to address this disparity. For SSDs, the Committee queried the cut-off date for state “saving” of SSDs, as well as the next steps and expected timing for implementation of Council’s preferred scenario.

MINUTES OF Extraordinary Meeting reconvened on 5 June 2025

PETITIONS

De-list isolated heritage houses in town centres for better outcomes in Ku-ring-gai 

Petition to Ku-ring-gai Council

Principal Petitioner: David Tindale (on behalf of A Better Outcome Under TOD (ABOUT)) 

Transport Oriented Development (TOD) is set to change the face of Ku-ring-gai. There is a critical housing shortage in NSW, so with 23 000 new dwellings planned for Gordon, Killara, Lindfield and Roseville, we believe it’s vital that new development be well planned to meet the needs of Ku-ring-gai into the future. 

Both TOD and Council’s Preferred Scenario retain individual heritage homes in the midst of high-density new town centres in Ku-ring-gai. These heritage houses will be isolated, lose their context and their value in both heritage and monetary terms. 

For the wider community, retaining isolated heritage homes will result in compromising achievable density in the areas zoned to become the new town centres. They will reduce the housing yield and force future rezonings deeper into our leafy suburbs. There is no value in preserving isolated heritage houses, nor those that will lose their context due to sweeping changes in the streetscape. 

Heritage owners need your support before the Ku-ring-gai Council Meeting on 5th June. Please add your address in the comments. 

We, the undersigned, ask that these orphaned heritage houses be de-listed in consultation with their owners, to allow the development of clever, innovative new town centres designed to maximise benefit for the new communities of these areas. 

(412 signatures as at 5 June 2025)

Resolved: (Moved: Councillors Balachandran/Ward) 

That the petition be tabled and forwarded to the relevant officer for appropriate action. 

|CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Petition: Protect The Lindfield Area – Stop the Disproportionate Development Burden and Safeguard Our Heritage 

Petition to Ku-ring-gai Council

Principal Petitioner: Lee Coomber (HOLD) 

We, the undersigned residents and stakeholders of the Ku-ring-gai local government area, strongly oppose the treatment of the Lindfield area under the proposed Transport Oriented Development (TOD) Preferred Scenario. While we support sustainable growth and strategic planning, the current proposal places an unfair and disproportionate share of new dwelling targets on the Lindfield area, with little regard for its unique character, infrastructure constraints, or heritage value. 

Our concerns include: 

1.      Disproportionate Dwelling Allocation: The Lindfield area is being asked to accommodate a significantly higher percentage of new dwellings (~9000) compared to other suburbs in the LGA (Killara ~3000, Roseville ~3000). This results in Lindfield accommodating apartment towers that are 61 meters in height / 18 stories. Note: This is prior to the affordable housing uplift of +30% for some dwellings. This approach lacks equity and fails to consider a balanced distribution of growth across the area. 

2.      Neglect of Heritage Conservation: The proposed scenario threatens numerous Heritage Homes and Heritage Conservation Areas in the Lindfield area. These historically significant homes and precincts contribute to the cultural fabric and identity of our community and must be preserved. 

3.      Lack of Transparent Community Engagement: The process to date has not adequately included or responded to resident feedback. Decisions of such magnitude should not proceed without meaningful consultation with the communities most affected. 

We respectfully call on Ku-ring-gai Council to: 

·         Reassess the TOD Preferred Scenario to ensure a fairer, more balanced distribution of housing targets across all Ku-ring-gai suburbs; 

·         Strengthen protections for Heritage Homes and Heritage Conservation Areas, particularly in the Lindfield area; 

·         Engage transparently with the community. providing adequate opportunity for Input and revision before final decisions are made. The Lindfield area deserves thoughtful planning that respects its past while responsibly considering its future. We urge Council to revise the current proposal to reflect the values and voices of our community. (547 signatures)

Resolved: (Moved: Councillors Taylor/Ngai) That the petition be tabled and forwarded to the relevant officer for appropriate action. 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

MINUTES OF EXTRAORDINARY MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 22 MAY 2025 (ADJOURNED)

Stop the inappropriate R4 zoned 12 metre developments on the fence lines of Treatts Road, Blenheim Road and 18 Kenilworth Road Heritage Conservation Area properties in Lindfield

Petition to Ku-ring-gai Council

We, the undersigned call upon Ku-ring-gai Council to reject the proposed development of R4 zoned 12 metre high dwellings on the fence lines of Treatts Road, Blenheim Road and 18 Kenilworth Road Heritage Conservation Area (HCA) properties in Lindfield. This proposal threatens the heritage character, residential amenity and community integrity of our neighbourhood.

Key Objections:

1. Heritage and Heritage Conservation Area (HCA) Impact

• The proposed 12-Meter dwellings are incompatible with the character and
  scale of the heritage conservation area.
• A 12-meter-high built form at the end of a traditional garden will create an
  overbearing presence and destroy the established visual harmony of the
  area. The scale and bulk are entirely inconsistent with the low-rise
  character that defines HCAs.
• Protecting Ku-ring-gai’s heritage means more than preserving individual
  buildings—it requires a commitment to the broader context, including
  garden settings, view corridors, and cohesive streetscapes. Allowing R4
  zoned 12-meter-high dwellings in these sensitive interfaces contradicts this
  purpose.

2. Loss of Amenity

• The proximity of the apartments to the fence line will result in a loss of
  privacy, overshadowing, and visual bulk.
• The height will block natural sunlight to existing gardens and living spaces.
• The noise and traffic from increased density will degrade the peaceful
  residential environment.

3. Traffic, Parking, and Infrastructure Stress

• Increased traffic and parking pressure on narrow heritage streets.
• Potential strain on local infrastructure, including drainage and utilities, not
  designed for this density.

We urge Ku-ring-gai Council to:

• Adhere to a road-based transition principle versus fence line to protect
  Heritage Conservation Area properties.
• Remove the R4 12-meter zoning for properties in 2-16 Kenilworth and 1-19
  Highgate Road, Lindfield.

(609 signatures) (updated on 5 June)

Resolved:
(Moved: Councillors Taylor/Ngai)
That the petition be tabled and forwarded to the relevant officer for appropriate
action.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY