Cumberland State Forest

2025-03 Submission from The Committee, West Pennant Hills Valley Progress Association Inc.

PP-2023-2300 Cumberland State Forest

On behalf of the residents of West Pennant Hills Valley (WPHV) the Committee of the West Pennant Hills Valley Progress Association (WPHVPA) objects to the proposal for 2 parcels of land contained within Cumberland State Forest (CSF) to be rezoned for housing.

BACKGROUND

The WPHVPA represents about 4,000 households and more than 10,000 residents located in the area bounded by Castle Hill Rd in the north, Pennant Hills Rd in the east, the M2 & Darling Mills Creek in the south and Excelsior Creek in the west.  The Cumberland State Forest (CSF) lies along the northern boundary of our area.

The Association has been in existence for more than 30 years and holds regular meetings where residents can voice their opinions.  Over the last few years, residents have fought hard to protect CSF from any adverse impacts due to the adjacent development at 55 Coonara Ave.  Residents also fought hard to have the original proposal rejected when it was considered by the Hills Shire Council in 2021.  WPHV residents are strongly opposed to the rezoning of any part of CSF, and this is supported by the objections set out below. 

CSF is Australia’s only metropolitan state forest, containing approximately 40ha of native forest.  It is a haven for native flora and fauna, and an important green space for residents, providing walking trails and picnic areas.  Due to our proximity to Cherrybrook Metro Station, the population of WPHV could double over the next few years, so it is vital to retain as much green space as possible for future residents to enjoy. 

OVERVIEW

CSF should remain intact for future generations to enjoy.

Being a metropolitan state forest, there will always be a conflict between preserving green space and the desire to profit from rezoning the land for residential use.  If this planning proposal is approved, it will set a dangerous precedent for CSF.  Other parcels of land may also be proposed for rezoning in the future.  Piece by piece, we may lose the whole forest.

Rather than reduce the size of this relatively small green space, the residents of WPHV would like to see the derelict cottages removed so that the area can be revegetated and retained as part of CSF.

If approved, the current proposal would impact 0.55 hectares of native vegetation, including 0.45 hectares of Critically Endangered Ecological Community (CEEC).  WPHV has already lost a large area of CEEC on the adjacent site at 55 Coonara Avenue where more than 400 homes are being constructed.  The CSF proposal advanced to Gateway because it was deemed to have merit, but the residents of WPHV see no merit in destroying a significant area of Critically Endangered Ecological Community in order to build just 4 homes.

This proposal should not be approved.

BASIS FOR OBJECTIONS

1.     Loss of critically endangered Blue Gum High Forest (BGHF) and Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest (STIF).

Objective 27 of the Regional Plan requires that ‘Biodiversity is protected, urban bushland and remnant vegetation is enhanced.’  This proposal will impact 0.45ha of CEEC made up of 0.16ha BGHF and 0.29ha STIF.  The proposal does not comply with Objective 27.

The Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEEW) has estimated that only 139ha of BGHF remained in 2004.  DCCEEW also states that one of the main ongoing threats to BGHF is ‘further clearing of vegetation for urban development’.  The residents of WPHV do not support the clearing of any further BGHF or STIF. 

2.     Loss of habitat for the Dural Land Snail and Powerful Owl.

The Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (BDAR) states that during the 2024 survey, the endangered Dural Land Snail was confirmed within the subject sites.  A breeding pair of Powerful Owls (listed as Vulnerable) was also observed.  This proposal will result in the loss of important habitat for our endangered and vulnerable native fauna.

3.     Inefficient and inappropriate use of land

The total amount of land to be rezoned for housing is approximately 0.71ha.  According to the site plan in the Gateway Assessment Report, approximately half of this land cannot be developed.  The whole site is bushfire prone and will require approximately half of the land to be used as an Asset Protection Zone.  This is a very inefficient use of the land, demonstrating that the land is not suited to residential development. 

Additionally, 2 rustic, single storey cottages which currently blend into the forest landscape, will be replaced by 4 large, modern dwellings up to 9 metres high which will look completely out of place.

4.     Inconsistent with Ministerial Directions

Direction 9.1 Rural Zones states that ‘RU3 Forestry is a rural zone under the Standard Instrument.’  and that a planning proposal must not rezone land from rural to residential.  The proposal does not comply with Direction 9.1.

5.      The Hills Shire has already met its housing targets

The Hills Shire does not need an additional 4 homes to be built in order to meet its housing targets.  These will be large luxury homes that do not contribute to housing diversity, nor will they be affordable given the large block size and the additional cost of building in a bushfire zone.

6.     The Exhibition Fact Sheet appears to contain misleading information.

The Fact Sheet states that ‘The subject site comprises two sites located in West Pennant Hills at 87-97 Castle Hill Road (Northern site, 3,322m2) and 121-131 Oratava Avenue (Southern site, 3,377m2)’, a total of 6699m².  However, the Gateway Assessment Report (GAR) shows a plan for the southern site of 3734m², making a total of 7056m².  The BDAR states that the total area to be rezoned is approximately 0.71ha, which is consistent with the GAR.

The Fact Sheet also states that both sites are ‘physically isolated’ from the larger forested area.  However, the bushfire report refers to vegetation surrounding the sites posing a bushfire risk for both sites.  The site location maps show that these two sites are not physically isolated from the forest.

The committee of WPHVPA had assumed the Fact Sheet could be relied upon for the purpose of informing our residents about this proposal.  We now find that the area of land to be rezoned has been understated and inaccurately described in this document, and that the public has been misled.  We consider this is an inadequate basis for the Panel to make a decision.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal.

'We are pleased that Council chose not to approve forwarding the planning proposal to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for a Gateway Determination until a decision has been made by the State Government about making CSF a National Park.  However, given the areas proposed for rezoning contain Critically Endangered Ecological Communities (CEEC), we feel that a better decision would have been to reject the proposal outright and not just hold it in abeyance.  Whilst we hope that elevating CSF to a National Park should give the forest, including the Blue Gum High Forest and Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest CEEC that it contains, the best possible long-term security, we do not think that it is relevant to judging the current rezoning proposal. We believe that the proposal is wrong whether it becomes a National Park or stays a State Forest. The status of the CEEC under the NSW Government Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 should guide the decision irrespective of whether it is State Forest or a National Park.  We will continue our fight to preserve all CEEC in our area.'

'On behalf of the West Pennant Hills Valley Progress Association, I urge all Councillors to reject this Planning Proposal.

Spot rezoning is inconsistent with Council’s Strategic Plan.

Reducing our tree canopy is inconsistent with Council’s Strategic Plan.

The State Government is currently considering turning Cumberland State Forest into a National Park.  It is inappropriate to support rezoning and selling-off parts of the forest before a decision about transferring it to National Park status has been made.

The argument that the proposal only affects land that is currently not accessible to the public is irrelevant.  If the land is rezoned and sold for development, the public will never have access.  But if Cumberland State Forest becomes a National Park, the public could have access to this land.

There is a suggestion that funds from the sale could be used to benefit Cumberland State Forest.  But it is just a suggestion.  There is no certainty that the funds will be used in this way.  There is no certainty that the funds will be used to benefit the environment anywhere in NSW. 

The proposed rezoning requires the removal of:

 0.16ha of Blue Gum High Forest

And

0.29ha of Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest

That’s a total of 0.45ha.

Both Blue Gum High Forest and Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest are listed as Critically Endangered Ecological Communities (CEEC) under the NSW Government Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016.

The only category worse than ‘Critically Endangered’ is ‘Extinction’

When the planning proposal for 55 Coonara Avenue was considered by DPIE last year, the proponent had to reduce the development footprint in order to avoid clearing Blue Gum High Forest and Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest.

If DPIE wouldn’t allow Mirvac to clear CEEC on private land, we question why Council would consider allowing CEEC to be cleared on a chunk of the Cumberland State Forest.

Cumberland State Forest is already a very small forest.  Let’s not make it any smaller.

The CEEC trees only need to be cleared if the land is rezoned.  Please save these critically endangered trees by saying no to this proposal.

Thank you on behalf of the residents of West Pennant Hills Valley.'

Letter From Matt Kean re  possibility of National Park status for CSF

Documents for 13/2019/PLP:

Planning Proposal

Biodiversity Assessment Report (revised September 2020)

Bushfire Assessment

Traffic Statement

Castle Hill Rd bushfire protection measures

Castle Hill Rd subdivision stage 1

Castle Hill Rd subdivision stage 2

Oratava Ave bushfire protection measures

Oratava Av subdivision stage 1

Oratave Ave subdivision stage 2