Pittwater Conservation Zones need to Stay

Keep Pittwater green

There is a constant barrage of development and incursion into the natural habitat that is contributing to our devastation of our lifestyle eg Hilltop Rd. This is a personal and social cost for all ratepayers and residents.

We are going to lose the reason people move here - the beautiful wildlife and trees

Why spoil something so beautiful and unique, leave well alone. I oppose any rezoning.

Our infrastructure is barely adequate for our current population. Any plans to re-zone properties in a manner which enables an increase in population density should be scrapped and rejected.

I oppose the propose rezoning. We live here because of the beautiful natural environment and want the C4 environmental living maintained and not rezoned as residential.

This is a big no no

UqIPcXBFDQ

Many properties are proposed to change from Conservation to Residential zoning.  Denser building development on land changing to a Residential zone will damage the leafy character of Pittwater.  The effect of changing so many blocks of land will result in over development and loss of environmental value. Many NBC documents list the importance our community places on the green natural environment and state Council’s intention to conserve and improve our natural environment.  State Environmental Planning Policies may be applied to land zoned Residential, overriding the level of development permitted by the Council. This is not the case with land zoned for Conservation.  Tree canopy is important to preserve on land between bushland reserves. Trees enable fauna to move around the landscape and between bushland reserves through gardens and road reserves.  Trees provide habitat for all sorts of fauna, for instance insects, birds and possums.  Trees provide shelter for people from heat and wind  The green treed character of Pittwater is very important to me, a reason I live here.  The criteria for permitting the changes from Conservation to residential zoning are incorrect.  Tree cover and wildlife corridor should be separated into two separate criteria and each be give the value HEV – High Environmental Value, not Medium Environmental Value as in the proposal.  Recognition of valuable tree cover on a block of land should be 30%, not 50%, to properly establish its environmental value.

The fact that areas that have previously been C-zoned are now proposed to be downgraded to R-zones demonstrates that Council's environmental zoning requirements (such as tree canopy retention and regeneration) have failed. There must be no downgrading of C zones. Instead, Council must provide practical encouragement for the environmental regeneration of land. These issues are particularly important in Pittwater, an area that we highly value for its environment, but where its environment is becoming more and more degraded under current Council business as usual approaches.

I oppose the propose rezoning. We live here because of the beautiful natural environment and want the C4 environmental living maintained and not rezoned as residential.

The Council needs to stop just paying lip service to environment issues and not allow overdevelopment in Pittwater by making these zoning changes. Australia now has more introduced species than natives! We need to conserve all we still have, and that means conserve what we have left. We moved to Pittwater in 1974 and in that time have seen so much environmental destruction. Where I live in Pittwater, we still have whipbirds, lyrebirds, echidnas, goannas and wallabies, yet on the other side of my street are some properties that are proposed to lose their conservation zoning!! Many people move to Pittwater because of its environmental beauty, but then remove the native bush to build enormous homes and plant gardens with wide lawns and square hedges. If they remove trees, they are not required to replace them with natives. To get their building approval, they say they will replant, but there is no follow up to ensure they do. The Council needs to create more conservation areas, not reduce them, or the remaining wildlife will disappear, like we no longer have koalas in Pittwater.

Pittwater is such a unique area that needs to be protected. I strongly object to a rezoning that increase density just because it is part of the greater NBC.

Our infrastructure is barely adequate for our current population. Any plans to re-zone properties in a manner which enables an increase in population density should be scrapped and rejected.

Don't destroy the natural beauty of our area. Increasing the density of the built environment will inevitably lead to such destruction.

concern that rezoning/development will result in unnecessary damage to native bushland and fauna within area. We need to take care of what we already have as natural environment.

I object strongly to the proposed rezoning for a number of reasons: Traffic congestion - as there is only one road from Avalon to Palm Beach; loss of trees and natural character of the beautiful Pittwater area.

The Zoning change will result in large developments of empty investment properties that will do nothing for housing more people

Further crowding on a geographically constrained peninsula is simply nothing less than ignorant stupidity! This council and its’ state government counterparts’ agenda must not ride roughshod over residents wishes and priorities!

Why NBC? Why? Who exactly is driving this rezoning proposal?