NSW Environment Office objects to Mirvac IBM site development proposal

The NSW Environment Office has issued a scathing objection to the planning proposal to build hundreds of homes at a business Park in Sydney’s north west, which is surrounded by endangered forests.

Objection letters ready to be submitted to Hills Shire Council by the Forest in Danger group in Baulkham Hills. Picture: Angelo Velardo

• IBM site development: Hornsby Council objects to Mivac Micro-lot development
• Mirvac IBM development: residents call for forest to be handed over to National Parks
• 3000 objection letters for Mirvac development
• Plans for ‘micro lot housing’ at West Pennant Hills IBM

Plans to transform the IBM Business Park at West Pennant Hills into hundreds of homes as part of a new community by Mirvac may need to go back to the drawing board, following a NSW Government objection to the development.

On June 14, the NSW Environment and Heritage Office submitted a series of objections relating to the planning proposal at 55 Coonara Ave, West Pennant Hills, highlighting serious concern around the impact the development would have on remnant Blue Gum High Forest and Sydney Turpentine-Ironbark Forest within the footprint of the proposal development.

An artist impression of the development at 55 Coonara Ave, West Pennant Hills.

The submission highlights an upcoming preliminary determination to list the Sydney Turpentine-Ironbark Forest as critically endangered, alongside the Blue Gum High Forest, as they both “meet the principles and criteria for serious and irreversible impact”.

“Development consent cannot be granted to proposals which impact on serious and irreversible impact entities,” NSW Environment planner Dana Alderson said.

Under the plans for 600 homes at the site, dozens of trees within the business park would be removed, while other remnant forest clusters would be rezoned as E2 environmental conservation.

Community groups are calling on residents to take a stand against the “inappropriate development” of the former IBM site in West Pennant Hills, adjoining the Cumberland State Forest. Picture: Ryan Osland

However, the office raised concerns about the methods used to identified threatened species in the development footprint.

“The biodiversity assessment lists threatened flora species recorded from the area and their likelihood of occurrence on the site,” Ms Alderson said.

“The biodiversity assessment states that ‘targeted random meanders’ were carried out on site, it is assumed that this method was used to survey for threatened flora species.

“It is noted that large parts of the site, including areas that are proposed to be cleared, do not appear to have been surveyed for threatened flora.”

An overview of the proposal.

Ms Alderson said it was unclear if threatened species may be impacted by the proposal and also raised concerns about the impact the proposal would have on the parliament of powerful owls that calls the forests home.

Mirvac development director Adrian Checchin said, “maintaining the unique ecological characteristics of the site at Coonara has always been a key priority, which is why we have sought the highest protection environmental conservation zoning”.

“We will continue to work closely with our ecologists in accordance with relevant legislation, to ensure the ecological communities are protected,” he said.

“It is important to note that there is a clear footprint already established by former development on the site, and under current controls, the whole site is zoned business park to a height of 22 metres.”

The Advisory director for the National Trust, Graham Quint has also objected to development at the IBM SITE in West Pennant Hills. Picture: Justin Sanson

Mr Checchin said Mirvac’s proposal provides “far greater protection to remnant forest areas” than the existing controls.

“We acknowledge the letter received by the Office of Environment and Heritage as normal practice during the statutory referral process,” he said.

ForestinDanger spokeswoman Jan Primrose said “we do not believe that the planning proposal can be approved in its current format”.

“Significant redesign would be required and therefore the Draft DCP, the Planning Proposal and the Voluntary Planning Agreement would need to be re-exhibited,” she said.

“We do not believe that Mirvac should be granted any further extension of time to the Gateway Determination beyond the July 31 deadline, given Mirvac’s apparent continuing failure to properly consider preservation of the Blue Gum High Forest on the site”.

IN OTHER NEWS