Attend our 3rd public Meeting to save Middle Head

Dear Community Member,We urge you to attend our 3rd public meeting to Save Middle Head to will be held next Thursday 20 February, 6.30-7.30pm at the Mosman Senior Citizen’s Centre (next to Mosman Town Hall, Mosman Square, Spit Junction).

Agenda

  • Mr David Shoebridge, MLC NSW Parliament, Australian Greens, will speak to the proposal to build a large private aged care residential facility on Middle Head.

  • Special Counsel Ilona Millar, Baker & McKenzie, will speak and take questions about why the proposal is unlawful.

  • We have uncovered some mistakes and inconsistencies in the proponent’s documents and will give a short slide presentation.

An Advisor from Senator Birmingham’s office will attend (but not speak).

Headland Preservation Group Inc was Re-formed

Following the meeting we will celebrate the re-instatement of the Headland Preservation Group Inc re-registered on 6 February 2014.Please join us for celebratory drinks and snacks.WHEN: 6.30pm – 7.30pm, Thursday 20 February 2014 WHERE: Mosman Council Senior Citizen’s Centre, entrance next to Mosman Town Hall, Mosman Square, Spit Junction.

View/download a PDF flyer for our meeting announcement here.

Letters to the Editor

Elizabeth Farrelly's article 'Peat Island sale is a bridge too far', Sydney Morning Herald (SMH), 6 February 2014, was met with a wave of dismay and disbelief at the tone and inaccuracies with regard to the Middle Head aspects of the story.'Rainer the cabbie – Darlo and beyond' 6 Feb commented online "This piece of National Park is today the pearl of the harbour, to be enjoyed by locals, Sydneysiders and tourists alike."Fran Lester's Letter to the SMH Editor 7 Feb  'Harbour's beauty is for everyone, so let's protect it' got right down to the bottom line in more ways than one "It makes no difference whether it's for aged care, a cookery school or a red-light brothel. It's just the wrong thing to do."Then came the carpeting of Ms Farrelly's article with a stream of Letters to the SMH Editor on Saturday 8 Feb. The high number published was clearly the tip of a very cold iceberg of responses to what Ms Farrelly had to say. Read on!'It's about parkland for all, not just a few'SMH Letters, February 8, 2014Nearly two decades ago, communities came together to oppose the sell-off of Defence land in a legendary ''Battle for Sydney Harbour''. The Sydney Harbour Federation Trust resulted from this clamour. The original vision of the community - ''a world-class national park for all Australians'' - has been achieved. Elizabeth Farrelly (''Let Mosmanites fight for Peat Island'', February 6) is right to applaud the trust and its executive Geoff Bailey.I was one of those people all those years ago. Sadly, it is deja vu because of the trust's apparent support of a development application (by a private company) for an aged-care home on the ridge line of Middle Head, one of Australia's most loved heritage sites.Ms Farrelly is well-respected and thoughtful. This time, however, she has got it wrong. The scale is indeed large - it is nearly double the existing gross floor area. The 25-year lease is a long one and would likely be renewed if it's elderly people living there. It is akin to a sale.The trust has lost our trust.Linda BerginPresident, Headland Preservation Group, Mosman


Elizabeth Farrelly's piece on the future of Peat Island was interesting. Like many Sydneysiders, I have driven past that geographical feature of the Hawkesbury many times. With its bleak-looking buildings and towering smokestack, I'd often wonder what went on there. I can recall 20 years ago saying ''wouldn't the developers love to get their little hands on that piece of real estate''. It's taken a while but sadly looks as if it could be around the corner.Ross MacPherson Seaforth
Elizabeth Farrelly overlooks the objectives in the 2001 act establishing the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust. The proposal for the aged-care home contravenes all four of the principal objectives of the act. The proposal is also not possible without major amendments to the trust's management plan 2007. Finally the proposal is inconsistent with the trust's notice board outside the Terminal 10 building stating the original intentions.David Clarke Mosman
Elizabeth Farrelly focuses on the argument that a ''heritage-listed building needed a use'' - as if that somehow should override the fundamental principle of preserving the public parkland as public parkland in perpetuity.If it came to that, Centennial Park has much more public parkland than Middle Head, is much closer to the inner-city neighbourhoods that Farrelly raved about in a recent column and could make a much bigger contribution to solving the aged-care needs of the city.Farrelly's articles are usually well thought out and interesting. But for someone who has railed against the planning fiasco of Barangaroo to be so glib and dismissive of a proposed land grab of iconic Sydney Harbour foreshore land is both surprising and disappointing.Robert Bagnall Mosman
Elizabeth Farrelly misses the point. The proposed aged-care facility at Middle Head is all about a privatisation agenda that threatens public land that rightfully belongs to the people of Sydney and the nation. Why should we hand over our harbour foreshores to private profit?Janine Kitson Gordon
Elizabeth Farrelly should consider the words of Prince Charles: ''It seems to me that some planners and architects have consistently ignored the feelings and wishes of the mass of ordinary people in this country.'' By making demeaning comments about the ''burghers of Mosman'', Ms Farrelly clearly fails to realise that this issue goes far beyond the immediate environs of Mosman and shows that, by Prince Charles' definition, at least, she is not a good architect.Michael Robinson Cammeray
Oldies living in high care at Middle Head will have their hands too full managing medication, ravenous commercial operator and existential heebie-jeebies to appreciate one of Sydney's signature headlands. Build the facility on Allan Border Oval.Patrick Fletcher Mosman
Harbour's beauty is for everyone, so let's protect it (published 7th Feb)Elizabeth Farrelly (February 6) says the Peat Island issue ''could use some implacable Mosmanites'' to fight the cause.As a Mosmanite who lives next door to Middle Head, I'd be happy to fight for Peat Island.Ms Farrelly might be surprised to know that among all those Mosman burghers who are out rampaging on Middle Head with their pitchforks, there are quite a lot of George Smiley-like characters. They harbour other Smiley-like characteristics: industry, tenacity, intelligence. Most come from somewhere else; I am a Kogarah kid.A lot of mud gets slung at Mosmanites, so Ms Farrelly is not alone, just predictable. Mostly it's just sour grapes - look at all those toffs over there, ''latte sippers patronising popular cafes and restaurants''. But the truth is that the people who park in my street on weekends are not Mosmanites. They're from everywhere. Two Frenchmen I met here couldn't get over the beauty of the foreshore parklands. And that's great. Why? Because what matters is the parkland is for everyone.The bottom line? The Sydney Harbour Federation Trust needs money. To get it, it's prepared to forsake its charter and give a private developer the go-ahead to construct a very ugly large building in national parkland. It makes no difference whether it's for aged care, a cookery school or a red-light brothel. It's just the wrong thing to do.Fran Lester Mosman
'It's about parkland for all, not just a few'Comments, February 6, 2014The one thing overlooked in this article is the passion most Mosmanits have for their district.When the Army moved out of George's Heights the government of the day had plans to sell off the land to fill their coffers.To prevent this the local residents formed an action group and fought long and hard to return the land back to the general public and include it in the Harbour Nation Park.This cannot be written off as Nimbism. The land was then handed over to the Harbour Trust which made great use of the exciting facilities without causing any environtmental impact. The walking tracks were restored and extended to take in the unique beauty of this area.This piece of National Park is today the pearl of the harbour, to be enjoyed by locals, Sydneysiders and tourist alike. All this was achieved without any change to the existing framework of the buildings, the best compromise if ever I've seen one.This principle should never be altered so the future for one of Sydney's unique spots is secured for all in the future.Congratulations to the so called " Pitchfork brigade", your work was not in vain and keep on going for the benefit of all.CommenterRainer the cabbieDarlo and beyond
Dear Dr Farrelly,As a long time fan of your social and architectural analysis articles I am very disappointed at the lazy passion-aggressive effort you've made in this case.It was community action by the so-called 'burghers of Mosman' and the Headland Preservation Group in the late 1990s which saved Georges Heights, Middle Head and Chowder Bay from sale by the Defence Department for private residential development.It was the Headland Preservation Group and Linda Bergin OAM, Phillip Jenkyn OAM and Peter Jones AM who constructed the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust not Geoff Bailey. He is a tenant of the Harbour Trust not its architect.Cockatoo Island is a Biennale of Sydney venue because community action kept the land in public hands not because John Howard bestowed the Harbour Trust on it. Community action > public land > Harbour Trust.How about coming over to Middle Head for an alternative tour. You might see Middle Head from another perspective. We might even buy you a burger :-)Michael MangoldCommenterMichael MangoldMiddle Head, Mosman

Phil Jenkyn OAM – why the proposal should not proceed

Phil Jenkyn OAM is a retired barrister and former alderman. Over the years he has been involved in many environmental and heritage battles. He was the first Chair of Defenders of Sydney Harbour Foreshores and the Joint Convener of Protectors of Public Lands. He was awarded an OAM (2005) for services to the protection and preservation of the environment, particularly heritage sites on the Sydney Harbour foreshore. In 2010 he received the National Trust’s Lifetime Achievement Award for his contribution to heritage conservation. He is a member of the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust’s Community Advisory Committee, and a member of the Sydney Harbour National Landscape Steering Committee.Above: Phil addressing the large public meeting re Middle Head 23 January 2014 1. INTRODUCTIONA Development Application has been made to the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust for a private 93 unit aged care residential facility on public land at Middle Head in Sydney Harbour. It is proposed to convert and enlarge the ‘Ten Terminal’ buildings, and to demolish and build on the Barracks site on the other side of Middle Head Road, so as to accommodate the facility. Middle Head is well recognised nationally as being a very significant and special place.In order to objectively and appropriately assess the merits of this application, one needs to go back in time to see how it was that the Trust was established, to look closely at the Act governing the Trust and the various plans that it has made, the heritage values of Middle Head and the particular site where the development is proposed, and to evaluate the actual proposal and any impacts it may have on those heritage and environmental values. It is then and only then that one can make a proper assessment as to what should happen to these buildings on Middle Head. That must be done in accordance with the obligation under the Act to protect, conserve and preserve the environmental and heritage values of this significant place.Middle Head one of a number of significant sites in Sydney Harbour saved by the community 2. THE BATTLE FOR SYDNEY HARBOURA real and desperate battle was fought by the community between 1996 and 1998 to prevent the Commonwealth Government and the Defence Department from going ahead with their decision to sell off former Defence sites in Sydney Harbour to private developers. These sites included nationally significant public land at North Head, Woolwich and Cockatoo Island, and in Mosman at Georges Heights and Middle Head.A coalition of action groups from around the Harbour was formed called ‘Defenders of Sydney Harbour Foreshores’ and as a result of a very vigorous campaign the Prime Minister John Howard in September 1998 announced that the Government had recognised that these public lands were in fact “the jewel in the nation’s crown” and stated that “they would be protected for the people of Australia”. The Headland Preservation Group inMosman played a leading role in the campaign. It has recently re-formed and established this website.After the election of 1998 it became clear that while the Government was to establish a Trust, funding would be limited to the planning stage and remediation of sites. It produced a Bill in Parliament that would require the Trust to be self-funding and gave it the directionand power to sell off significant heritage sites to fund its operations. This led to a further battle that resulted in a Senate Inquiry and the drafting of a proper Bill protecting the lands, drafted not by the Government but by a coalition of ‘Defenders’, Opposition Parties and a number of Councils. In the end the Government gave way and in early 2001 the community got its ‘Sydney Harbour Federation Trust Act’, legislation that really does protect and preserve these sites. The self-funding clause was deleted.From 2002 departmental funds were appropriated for capital works and operations. However since 2009 the Government has no longer funded capital works or operational costs. This has meant that the Trust has not been able to complete the necessary works on its heritage buildings to a level that would enable it to find the best adaptive reuses for these buildings. Buildings such as the Artillery School at North Head and Ten Terminal at Middle Head and some buildings on Cockatoo Island do not now have the funds to be restored and renovated to an appropriate level for leasing. This is indeed a very shortsighted view of Government and is to be condemned in strong terms. The Trust is the leader in good public planning in Australia and with a reasonably modest injection of funds would achieve world’s best practice status and self-sufficiency. These funds must be provided.3. THE ACT AND PLANSIt is important to consider and understand a number of the provisions in the relevant Act and in the Plans prepared by the Trust.In the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust Act 2001 the Preamble states: “The Parliament intends to conserve and preserve land in the Sydney Harbour region for the benefit of present and future generations of Australians.” Important sections of the Objects clause oblige the Trust “to protect, conserve and interpret the environmental and heritage values of Trust land” and “to maximise public access to Trust land”. One function of the Trust is “to promote appreciation of Trust land, in particular its environmental and heritage values”.In the Trust’s Comprehensive Plan for all the sites, there is a section ‘The Trust’s Approach to Planning’. It states “The Trust, by contrast, is seeking the most appropriate outcome, inspired by the intrinsic values of the lands, one that will be of most benefit to all Australians now and for the future.”One of the aims of the Management Plan for Middle Head is “Regenerate and expand the bushland so that the sense of a ‘green’ gateway to Sydney Harbour is reinforced”.4. MIDDLE HEADThe natural values of Middle Head and Georges Heights are of national and international significance. This applies to both the Trust’s lands and the adjoining Sydney Harbour National Park. Middle Head is a wonderful natural headland dominating the entry into Sydney Harbour. The foreshore areas between Manly and the Zoo – the bushland, harbour beaches, water vistas and much more, have been identified as exceptional places to be experienced by visitors and the community.The Sydney Harbour National Landscape (SHNL) was launched in February 2013. Its boundary follows the foreshore areas of Sydney’s harbour and coast from Barrenjoey in Ku- ring-gai Chase National Park to North Head, on through Middle Head to the Harbour Bridge and to Parramatta Park, back to South Head and down into Royal National Park. SHNL was chosen by Tourism Australia and Parks Australia as being one of the 16 best destinations to experience Australia’s outstanding nature and culture. Middle Head is a critical part of this assessment.Above: Ten Terminal and Barracks site at Middle Head proposed for aged care facilityThe Australian School of Pacific Administration (ASOPA), the 15 weatherboard ‘huts’ on the right as you proceed east along Middle Head Road past the oval, was built in 1941 and is of considerable heritage significance. It recently has been ‘restored’ and renovated keeping its heritage values and leased. This has been done to the Trust’s best practice standard. Public access has also been maintained.The School of Military Engineering (later Ten Terminal) was built c1941. During the Second World War it was occupied by the School of Military Engineering Anti-aircraft and Fortress Wing. The School of Military Intelligence occupied the buildings from 1958 and the Ten Terminal Regiment from 1974 to 1998. In 1998 it was handed to the Sydney Property Disposal Unit. The community battle prevented its sale to private developers. It remains unoccupied and has not yet been ‘restored’ and renovated.The three timber Barracks buildings and laundry are on the left hand side of Middle Head Road just past the Oval proceeding east. Apart from the small ‘Guard House’ close to the oval which is to be kept, there are no other structures on what is a natural area abutting the National Park. The Barracks were built 1951-55 and are not occupied.Above: Ten Terminal is comprised of the buildings at top left centre, the Barracks are the three buildings in lower part of photo and ASOPA is the collection of light coloured ‘huts’ top right5. HERITAGE ASSESSMENTThe applicant for an aged care facility on Middle Head has lodged a ‘Heritage Impact Statement’ (heritage report) with the application.The heritage report in relation to the Ten Terminal precinct states:“The former brick and tile World War 2 School of Military Engineering buildings at Middle Head (later Ten Terminal) form a relatively rare collection of such buildings at a National level. Within NSW only the almost contemporary School of Artillery at North Head and the former 12 Lines of Communication complex at Boronia Park (Gladesville) are known to survive outside military establishments.”“Although used variously for training and administration, substantial documentary and physical evidence of the original configuration and detail of the building survives, including window joinery, doors and partitions.”Ten Terminal is listed on the Commonwealth Heritage List. Clearly it is of considerable heritage significance given its design, rarity, intactness, history and setting on significant public land adjoining the national park. It should be restored with appropriate uses.Appropriate uses for Ten Terminal could involve the interpretation of that site and ASOPA adjoining, interpretation of the natural values of Trust land and adjoining national park, and of the important Aboriginal occupation of this area. It is the only site that could give direct information to visitors who wish to enjoy and learn about Middle Head.The Barracks buildings on the other hand are of low, if any, heritage significance. They are considered in the report:“The assessment of significance of III Anti-Aircraft Battery Barracks Precinct concludes that it does not, as a specific part of the Middle Head and Georges Heights military area, reach the thresholds of the Commonwealth significance assessment criteria.”In my view the natural values of the northern side of Middle Head Road past the oval heading east far outweigh any argument for the retention of the Barracks buildings. They must go.6. THE AGED CARE PROPOSALThe application is for a 93 unit private residential aged care facility on public land at MiddleHead.It is proposed to be on both sides of Middle Head Road, the route that leads directly to the Middle Head entrance of Sydney Harbour National Park.Above: Blue is the existing footprint and Below: Red is the proposed footprint and yellow is private open space It is intended to add a second storey, slightly set back, over the existing single storey buildings of Ten Terminal. In doing so the whole character of Ten Terminal is visually and factually changed. Its heritage values are seriously adversely affected.The footprint of the new facility is greater than existing, as can be seen in the plans and drawings and in the model. There is to be ‘screening’ landscaping around the facility which will also include a secured outside area for dementia patients. Instead of being able to walk through the collection of buildings and into some or all of the buildings, the public will be kept out of what would become a private facility. This is contrary to the object of the Act “to maximise access”.Above: The applicant’s model of the proposed aged care facility showing the significant adverse impacts to the character and heritage values of the existing Ten Terminal buildingsThe applicant’s heritage report states:“The proposed adaptation of the former School of Military Engineering to provide an aged persons' health care facility will cause significant physical changes to the fabric, form and interiors of some building elements and the setting of the precinct.”The extended and enlarged footprint and an underground car park for a new building to replace the three Barracks, all this in an area that should become a natural place, means one thing. This building must never happen.The aged care facility is clearly contrary to the object of the Act to protect, preserve and conserve the environmental and heritage values of these significant lands.It is also contrary to the Trust’s Comprehensive Plan, to the way it is obliged to go about its planning and the way to date it has gone about its planning. The record of the Trust is without equal in Australia. What it has achieved at Chowder Bay, at Woolwich, at Georges Heights and to date at Cockatoo and elsewhere is truly remarkable and has brought great credit to all involved. It is also one of the few Government bodies that genuinely listen to community. What the community asks is for the Trust to maintain its high standard.7. WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN(a) The application or proposal should not proceed. Alternatively, if it does proceed it should be rejected. It is simply not appropriate.(b) The Barracks must come down. This area adjoining the national park should be natural. (c) Ten Terminal must be restored given its significance.(d) Appropriate uses for Ten Terminal, after further consideration by the Trust and community, could include the interpretation of its significant values, interpretation of ASOPA and the natural areas of both the Trust’s lands and the national park. It could also provide information for visitors and others who are coming to Middle Head.(e) One matter that I also have a very strong view on is that somewhere on Georges Heights or Middle Head there should be a place that recognises the incredible culture and history of the Aboriginal peoples, generally and as it relates to this particular area. The site of Ten Terminal or part of it or nearby land may or may not be an appropriate place. What is or is not appropriate must come from Aboriginal peoples. No other way is acceptable.(f) The Trust and National Parks should work very closely in the way they welcome people to Middle Head and how they interpret and care for Middle Head.(g) The call from the community to the Trust is clear. Keep your high standards. The community fought hard for this. The Act is clear and insists upon it.(h) The call to the Government is also clear. Properly fund the Trust. Get it to the point where its buildings have been restored to a level for appropriate uses or leasing. Then it can truly be said that the Trust is self-funding. It can then also be said that the Trust’s sites embody world’s best practice.Phil Jenkyn OAM4 February 2014

Astounded the Trust is considering development proposal

Submission reproduced with permissionTo: The Directors, Sydney Harbour Federation TrustPO Box 607 Mosman 208826 January 2014Re Aged Care Proposal MiddleI attended the Save Middle Head meeting on 23rd January and it was only then that the full magnitude of the aged care facility was revealed in graphic detail showing the increase in scale of the proposal relative to the footprint and bulk of the existing buildings. I have to say that I was astounded that the management and board were even considering such a proposal given my understanding of the Trust’s mandate.Although I know the area well, yesterday I took the trouble to walk right around the site and make a closer inspection of the harbour foreshore on both sides of Middle Head Road. Although heavily screened by trees it is apparent that this land has magnificent views on both sides that are ideal to establish for public recreation which is the very essence of the Trust. There is a notice outside the Terminal 10 buildings stating the Trust’s objectives in relation to the side of the road adjacent to the Oval; to adapt or demolish the barrack buildings and to open up the views to Middle Harbour. I fail to see how it can be possible to open up the wonderful views to Middle Harbour without demolishing the barrack buildings. It is the creation of open space to enjoy such views which is the Trust's objective in creating a park for public access. A new residential construction simply cannot be reconciled with the objectives shown on the Terminal 10 notice.On the Trust’s website, "Middle Head Aged Care Facility FAQs", No 6 states; "The proposal is consistent with the Harbour Trust’s objectives" That statement is an egregious fabrication and by endorsing it the Board is in dereliction of its mandate from the Commonwealth Government. I refer you to the objectives as stated in the Sydney Harbour Trust Act 2001.Objective 1. "To ensure that management of Trust land contributes to enhancing the amenity of the Sydney Harbour region."The construction of buildings with double the footprint and bulk of the current buildings could not in any circumstance be construed as enhancing the harbour foreshore. I have stated above that the site encompasses some of the finest views on the Trust’s property and as such provides the perfect amenity for public access and recreation once the vegetation is cleared. The construction of residential buildings will eliminate the opportunity to create such an amenity. The Aged Care Facility therefore contravenes Objective 1 of The Act.Objective 2. "To protect conserve and interpret the environmental and heritage value of the Trust land."A building development of residential units with ancillary facilities for 93 people and associated support staff could not in any circumstances be construed to protect nor conserve let alone interpret the environment or heritage of the land. The Aged Care proposal therefore contravenes Objective 2 of The Act.Objective 3. "To maximise public access to the Trust land."The Trust’s website FAQ No 3 states that the enclosed area is 9400 square meters or approximately 1 hectare. How can closing off 1 hectare on one of the most scenic sites on the Trust land be reconciled with maximising public access. It is self evident that the Aged Care proposal contravenes Objective 3 of the Act.Objective 4. "To establish and manage suitable land as a park on behalf of the Commonwealth as the National Government."As stated above the site under consideration for the Aged Care Facility includes some of the finest panoramic views of the Harbour on Trust land. As such there is no site more suited for establishment as parkland. To block the establishment of parkland on such a prime site in favour of residential development is a clear contravention of Objective 4.The stated facts provide irrefutable evidence that the proposed Aged Care Facility is in contravention of the four prime objectives stipulated in the Act establishing the Trust. The Aged Care proposal is quite contrary to the stated objectives on the sign currently displayed outside the Terminal 10 buildings. Finally the proposal must be contrary to the Trust's Management Plan 2007 if the Trust sees the need to amend it.I challenge the Trust to publicly repeat its statement that "The proposal is consistent with the Harbour Trust's objectives", substantiating such statement in relation to the four prime objectives stipulated in the Act 2001. If the Trust is unable to substantiate that statement in relation to the proposed Aged Care Facility, each member of the Board should consider their position.DTH Clarke

Large turnout for public meeting held on January 23

Turnout for the public meeting to Save Middle Head held on January 23 was unusually large and we counted 180-190 with many standing and some unfortunately being turned away.

There was no evident support for the aged-care proposal at the meeting, and much applause in opposition to the proposal.Our President Linda Bergin OAM returned early from overseas to be able to Chair the meeting, in light of the urgency of the campaign.

The Harbour Trust did not attend with the exception of Board Member Peter Lowry OAM, however we did receive apologies from Board Members Clr Jean Hay AM and Leo McCleay.

Guest speaker Phil Jenkyn OAM, barrister and founder of Defenders of Sydney Harbour Foreshores, the original Defence land coalition formed in 1997, spoke eloquently and forcefully in opposition to the aged-care proposal. Phil visited the Trust and researched this proposal independently. He has concluded that the proposal is in violation of the Trust’s duty to conserve and care for its sites. Phil proposed the demolition of the 3 barracks and the adaptive re-use of Ten Terminal as aligning most with the heritage values of the site.

Also attending were members of “Save Little Manly Beach” and the President Jacqueline French spoke about their recent victory in the NSW Land and Environment Court against Manly Council’s attempt to sell foreshore land. (The Harbour Trust is not under this jurisdiction). Save Little Manly Beach expended around $200,000 to win its battle.

URGENT PUBLIC MEETING 6pm-7pm Thurs 23 January 2014 – Seniors Centre, Mosman Council, Spit Junction

Linda Bergin OAM has cut short her trip to Italy to return to Australia to address an urgent public meeting 6pm-7pm Thursday 23 January 2014 at Mosman Council Seniors Centre, entrance next to Mosman Town Hall, Mosman Square, Spit Junction. PUBLIC MEETING AGENDA

  • Aged-care campaign update
  • Launch of Headland Preservation Group and new website
  • Excerpt of documentary film “Battle For Sydney Harbour”
  • Guest speaker Philip Jenkyn OAM Founding Chair Defenders of Sydney Harbour Foreshores, 
barrister and legendary campaigner
  • Discussion proposed Indigenous Memorial Park and Cultural Centre

"We must continue to work to stop the development of 10 Terminal site on Middle Head in Headland Park," Linda Bergin said. "If this development is allowed it would be a large scale new residential development instead of adaptive reuse limited to open space and park objectives stated in the Harbour Trust Act. "Please attend this important public meeting to protect public land. Your continuing support is critical to the success of this campaign." At the public meeting Linda Bergin will be urging the Hon Tony Abbott, Prime Minister of Australia and MP for Warringah to personally intervene to suspend the development application for the development of a private residential aged care complex at the 10 Terminal site on public land on Middle Head. The Sydney Federation Harbour Trust's head office and the site of the proposed development are in the electorate of Tony Abbott. The then Prime Minister John Howard and Tony Abbott were instrumental in the original decision to establish the interim Sydney Harbour Federation Trust in September 1998: "On announcement of the establishment of the Interim Trust, the Prime Minister, the Hon. John Howard MP, reminded Australians that Sydney Harbour is ‘…probably the world’s greatest harbour. It is one of the great natural beauty spots of our nation. It is the cradle of European settlement in Australia and it is one of those parts of our country which gives immense pride and immense pleasure, not only to the residents of Sydney, but also to all Australians because it wins such wide acclaim around the world.’ "Prior to this it had been proposed to sell portions of the sites for redevelopment. This resulted in vigorous community opposition and as a consequence the Government decided to establish the Trust to devise a long-term plan to return the vacated land to the People of Australia, ‘…not just to the people of Sydney, not just to the people of the suburbs around Sydney Harbour but to all of the people of Australia.’" [Reference]

Standing Up For Middle Head On Boxing Day

Julie Goodsir* and a team of volunteers organised a massive effort at Georges Heights and Middle Head on Boxing Day to alert visitors from all over Sydney and beyond of the threat of private residential development facing a large section of the historic headland.
The visitors, many of whom travel to Georges Heights and Middle Head each year to gain unique vantage points on the Sydney to Hobart yacht race fleet, were shocked to learn public land and open space within their view could be overshadowed by private development.
"1500 people signed our petition to save Middle Head," Julie Goodsir said. "We only found out about the proposed development in mid-November and did not have much time to get our 'Save Middle Head' petition organised. It was so heartening to see so many people from all areas of Sydney wanting to sign our petition.
"In little more than a month, and at a very busy time of the year, our support base has grown to 2000 members. Tony Abbott was the Member for Warringah when the Headland Preservation Group campaigned to save this public land 17 years ago.
"Now Tony Abbott is not only the local member he is also our Prime Minister. I have heard he sometimes rides his bike down to Middle Head. Therefore he is familiar with this headland. What is at stake here is not a local issue but one for all Australians.
"The public land on Middle Head where the development of a private aged care facility is being proposed is an integral part of all the former Defence sites around Sydney Harbour that Linda Bergin, my late husband and the Headland Preservation Group, fought so hard and so rightly for, so long ago.
"We are not going to allow their legacy, and the time with their families that they sacrificed for all Australians, to be taken away forever.
"We would like a meeting with Tony Abbott here on the site. I think he is unaware of some of the issues at stake particularly the worrying precedent that approval of an aged care residential development would have for other parts of our iconic foreshore."
 *Julie Goodsir was heavily involved in the Headland Preservation Group led by Linda Bergin OAM and her husband the late Don Goodsir OAM. A sandstone bench was placed at Georges Heights in his memory after he lost his battle with cancer in 2010.

Let The Winds Of History Blow. Stop Private Development Of Public Land On Middle Head.

In just a few hours the Sydney to Hobart yachts will set sail after months of preparation and in many cases years of experience. The Sydney to Hobart is quintessentially a celebration of Sydney Harbour. The fleet will make its time-honoured charge down Sydney Harbour pursued by the equally traditional spectator fleet.At 86 years of age Syd Fischer, Mosman's elder statesmen of property and sea, will be setting off on his 45th Sydney to Hobart race. On Boxing Day Syd Fischer is Sydney, as enduring and enigmatic as the sandstone basin connecting the city to the sea.Syd has been a hard and uncompromising developer in Sydney for decades. However his love of sailing and record number of Sydney to Hobart yacht races make it impossible to imagine he would ever think building a massive aged care complex on Middle Head could ever be anything other than a very bad idea.Middle Head Mosman's historical significance as the point from which the indigenous people of Sydney first sighted the First Fleet entering Sydney Harbour has been highlighted repeatedly in public meetings to save Middle Head from this impending disaster. The evocative term 'First Contact' underlines the geographical and monumental nature of MiddleHead for all Australians.Michael MangoldSave Middle Head Team

Support From ASOPA Class of 1966-67

Keith Jackson studied at ASOPA (Australian School Of Pacific Administration) Class of 1966-67 on Middle Head, Mosman.  He is aware of the save Middle Head campaign and emailed us this message of encouragement, on 23 December 2013:G’day Save Middle Head,Please feel free to use any material we publish in the interests of your campaign to conserve the natural beauty and rich history of Middle Head. There are many of us old time ASOPA habitués observing what you are all doing -  in largely silent admiration I admit, but with much gratitude.Best wishes,Keith (Jackson)Brisbane, QueenslandKeith's studies at ASOPA and enduring connection with Papua New Guinea are reflected in his latest blog post which ends with a very uplifting Christmas message quoting Nelson Mandela: Keith's websiteImage: Australian School of Administration on Middle Head in the 1960s. Image courtesy asopa.typepad.com

Email Campaign Pauses for Christmas. Petitions and Letterbox Drops Take Over.

Special thanks to everyone taking up the challenge to send emails to key politicians. Save Middle Head's campaigning has focused on getting the urgent attention of Tony Abbott as Member for Warringah.However as many people have said so passionately at public meetings so far the 'Harbour Trust was established to protect public land for all Australians!' That’s why we're reaching out across Sydney to alert and inform as many people and politicians as possible about what's at stake.'Betrayal of trust', dismay and sheer disbelief that public land (fought for so resolutely by the community 17 years ago) is once again under threat; are recurring themes when people are told what is being proposed. "Wasn't the Trust established to protect public land?" is at the top of a long list of people's questions.There are also serious concerns about the dangerous precedent the privatisation of public land on Middle Head for residential health care would set. This is why we are taking the campaign to Joe Hockey's North Sydney electorate where the Harbour Trust's Platypus site on Neutral Bay is just across from the Neutral Bay ferry wharf.The Harbour Trust's site at Manly on North Head is also vulnerable. That's why we're asking members of the community to contact Councillor Jean Hay AM, Mayor of Manly and Harbour Trust Board member, to make her aware of their opposition to the proposals for Middle Head and their fears for North Head.By the proponent's own admission at public meetings, planning in consultation with Trust has been going on for at least a year. The highly detailed drawings and image simulations must have required a considerable amount of time and money to prepare. The community doesn’t understand why the Trust waited until the lead up to Christmas to let them know of their plans for public land on Middle Head.The Christmas 2013 holiday period is going to be memorable. A small army of volunteers has revised or put their Christmas holiday plans on hold to keep the Save Middle Head campaign going over the break. Please offer your help. Email: savemiddlehead@gmail.comThe speed, intelligence and passion with which the community responded in deconstructing the proposed Development is truly awesome. An amazing array of practising and retired professionals in architecture, building, design, development, accounting, finance, town planning, government administration, traffic control, health care, media, publishing, law, education, marketing and advertising are sharing their expertise, time and donations to channel their anger to save Middle Head.Have a great break. Keep up the good work, spread the word. We will all need to redouble our efforts very early in the New Year to Save Middle Head for everyone, forever!Save Middle Head TeamLinda Bergin OAM, Coordinatorsavemiddlehead@gmail.com

Sydney Harbour Federation Trust Act of Parliament 2001

Save Middle Head Team comment 14 December 2013

Attendees at the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust Public Board meeting 3pm Wednesday 11/12/13 demonstrated a deep understanding and commitment to the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust Act.In the questions and comments from the floor following 10 minute presentations to the Board by Linda Bergin OAM, Coordinator Save Middle Head and the proponent of the Development, Teelia Peploe, several members of the community requested the process be suspended to allow for an extension of community consultation.They challenged the legality of the proposed Amendments to the Middle Head Management Plan and questioned the validity of such Amendments to accommodate the proposed Development of an aged care facility.They were united in their praise of the achievements of the Sydney Federation Harbour Trust so far but dismayed by the lack of community consultation.Ms Anthea Tinney, Chair of the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust Board thanked community members for attending. Mr Geoff Bailey, Executive Director, Sydney Harbour Federation Trust told around 150 people who were present that "From hereon the Trust has a rather large task to assess a couple of  hundred submissions. Those submissions raise various and many issues which need to be pursued and adequately understood by the Trustees before they make a decision. From hereon they may well be asking the executive to provide them with further information on anything from views and vistas to and from the Harbour, traffic matters, and of the myriad of issues you raise in your own submissions and other issues that the Trustees themselves may raise. "How long that will take……..there's no timetable for that, but it's likely to take the next couple of months I would think."Save Middle Head TeamLinda Bergin OAM, Coordinatorsavemiddlehead@gmail.com

The Trust needs to consider other options

Submission to Sydney Harbour Federation Trust 10 December 2013By Fran LesterReproduced with permission

Submission re the Draft Amendment and Proposed Residential Aged Care Facility

I am writing to voice my concerns in relation to the above proposals, not because I happen to live in Mosman but because I am an Australian citizen.Approximately fifteen years ago I watched with admiration when Don Goodsir and Linda Bergin fronted the Headland Preservation Group and were instrumental in persuading the Federal Government to form what is now known as the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust. The Trust has been the guardian of the historic, harbour parklands entrusted to it and to date has done an excellent job  of adhering to the terms of the Act and maintaining the spaces for public use.I am a fifth generation Australian and the only member of my family to live in close proximity to one of these parklands.  The other members are scattered from the north coast of New South Wales to Bawley Point in the South. Whenever they come to visit me however, they always make a point of doing a walk through the bushland to Middle Head to take in the magnificent views.My point is - the Sydney Harbour parklands are not just for locals.  They are not just for Sydneysiders. They are for all Australians and perhaps just as importantly, for international visitors.  The parklands are historic and perhaps none more so than the Middle Head park. To build a new, large  and - from the look of the artist's drawings - rather ugly building that would be more in keeping with an urban, built-up area in the middle of the foreshore bushland is a particularly horrifying idea.The fact that there will be a substantial high care component and a dementia day care facility is also troubling.  Both of these proposals are inappropriate for public parkland as there will need to be 24 hour security services and nursing care.We all want to see more aged care facilities that are situated in pleasant surroundings and operated by experienced providers.  Perhaps in this regard low care residential accommodation could be a possibility at Middle Head and existing buildings could be adapted for re-use in keeping with the mandate given to the Trust.  A more comprehensive tender could be instigated inviting a variety of aged care facilitators to come forward with ideas.  The idea of an Aboriginal history museum on the headland is also an excellent one and very appropriate for the site.As the current custodian of our precious foreshores, the Trust needs do the right thing. It needs to look beyond the current proposal and consider other options  that would be in keeping with the terms of the Act.Kind regardsFran Lester

Suspend proposed Amendment and Development for Middle Head immediately

Submission to Sydney Harbour Federation Trust 11 December 2013By Marta Sengers and Michael MangoldReproduced with permission

RE:  1. Draft Management Plan for Middle Head Precinct (Amendment 1) and 2. Proposed Development – Residential Care Facility

We strongly oppose both the proposed Amendment of the Harbour Trust’s Management Plan and the proposed Development of a residential aged care complex on the 10 Terminal site.The proposals on both counts must be suspended immediately to allow the Harbour Trust to:

  • consult with the communities of Mosman and Sydney on the detail and impacts of these proposals on the Harbour Trust, 10 Terminal, other Harbour Trust sites
  • make the input from these communities know to Tony Abbott MP for Warringah, Greg Hunt MP and Minister for the Environment and Joe Hockey MP for North Sydney
  • urge Greg Hunt MP, Minister for the Environment, not to approve the proposed Aged Care Complex on the 10 Terminal site
  • urge Joe Hockey MP and Federal Treasurer to provide sufficient funding to allow the Harbour Trust to fulfil its existing Management Plan and negate the need to amend it or compromise it by entering an enduring agreement with Middle Health Care Pty Ltd, a shelf company and vehicle for investment by WP Investment Holdings and other investors

1. Draft Management Plan for Middle Head Precinct (Amendment 1):

We strongly oppose the proposed change to the Draft Management Plan for Middle Head Precinct. As stated in The Plan the Trust was formed:“To provide a lasting legacy for the people of Australia by helping to create one of the finest foreshore parks in the world and provide places that will greatly enrich the cultural life of the city and the nation.”AND to create a park to “link the natural and cultural assists of the site” with building to be adapted for use for educational, community and recreational uses.”The then Prime Minister John Howard said that the establishment of the Trust: “....will prevent any ad-hoc treatment of the return of the land to the people and it will ensure that there is maximum weight given to the desire of all Australians that the maximum advantage be derived in open space and recreational purposes in relation to the land.”The proposed changes are in total conflict with the original intent and vision for Middle Head and would set a dangerous precedent for other public land currently managed by both the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust (SFHT).The SFHT has proposed the changes in response to the specific requirements of a developer and if implemented will send a clear message to all developers that the Plan can be changed and bent to the benefit of their commercial interests.The proposed Amendment facilitates the construction of a large, commercial development for private purposes of around 30,000 - 40,000 square metres (not 11,000 square metres as suggested in the development application) of public land that would exclude the vast majority of the public.The Amendment will allow residential development on public land the conflicts of interest that led to the formation of the community’s Headland Preservation Group and ultimately the Sydney Harbour Federation Act of Parliament and the formation of the Harbour Trust to utilise, secure and protect public land from residential development.The proposed Amendment conflicts with the SFHT Act and the Objects of the SFHT as does the proposed development of an Aged Care Complex on the 10 Terminal site – the Amendment would otherwise not need to be proposed.The proposed Amendment and proposed Development are part and parcel of a single process instigated to expedite and to a large extent bypass public consultation by making the community aware of the proposals in the busy pre-Christmas period thus limiting the opportunities for members of the community to study, research and understand what is being proposed and to provide meaningful feedback to the Harbour Trust and to Tony Abbott MP for Warringah, Greg Hunt MP and Minister for Environment, and Joe Hockey MP for North Sydney and Federal Treasurer.The Sydney Harbour Federation Trust Act was enacted by Federal Parliament to:

  • ensure that management of Trust land contributes to enhancing the amenity of the Sydney Harbour region;
  • protect, conserve and interpret the environmental and heritage values of Trust land;
  • maximise public access to Trust land;
  • establish and manage suitable Trust land as a park on behalf of the Commonwealth as the national government;
  • co-operate with other Commonwealth bodies that have a connection with any Harbour land in managing that land;
  • co-operate with New South Wales, affected councils and the community in furthering the above objects.

The public land 10 Terminal is on Middle Head and indeed all public land managed by the Sydney Federation Harbour Trust belongs to the people of Australia.The Harbour Trust is legally, politically, socially, morally and environmentally bound maintain and fulfil its management plan  to uphold its moral and social responsibility without Amendments to ensure the public land it has been given responsibility for is preserved and protected for everyone, forever. And not allowed to be alienated and exploited for the benefit of a shelf company, developer and investors!

2. Proposed Development – Residential Aged Care Complex:

We strongly oppose the Development proposed by Middle Head Health Care as outlined in the Development Application. This type of development created an outcry on the late 1990s and was the reason behind the formation of the Headland Preservation Group and the formation of the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust to enable former defines sites to be returned to the public and held in Trust for all Australians.To date the Trust has done an admirable  job of creating the Headland Park at Georges Head and Middle Head and sensitively re-using and adapting existing buildings in a way that has a low impact on the surrounding parkland, generates revenue and keeps public land open and accessible to local residents and the wider community of Sydney and beyond.The commercial components have allowed small companies to flourish and be part of a vibrant community that includes cafés, yoga studios, gyms, consultants and small businesses. In keeping with the Harbour Act these businesses have a light footprint that do not affect the fabric of buildings or their surroundings and prevent their use for other applications. They are not residential and they do not operate 24/7. Lease terms are limited and rents realistic and inline with other commercial properties in and around Sydney.The proposed Development has been put forward by a shelf company which is a vehicle for investors. It is a large private commercial residential development to be built on the Middle Head ridge line on public land on over 30,000 square metres on both sides of Middle Head Road. The development will be given a 20 – 25 years lease and will operate 24/7 within Headland Park, a truly national park created for all Australians and directly responsible to the Australian Parliament and Government.The proposed Development will exclude the vast majority of the public. It does not fit with the Harbour Trust’s vision that:“The plan proposes the creation of an exciting Headland Park at Middle Head… The park will link the natural and cultural assets of the site…. facilities and buildings will be adapted for educational, community and recreational uses.”Having studied the development proposal closely and at length we present the following points from a considered and informed position:

  • size and scope of the proposal is of a large scale when compared with other aged care facilities (almost double when compared to many other in and around Mosman)
  • there is provision for demolition of the existing Barracks buildings and the construction of completely new structures on the northern side of Middle Head Road, much larger and not within the existing footprints
  • all the 10 terminal buildings that are currently standing as separate structures with a lot of space in and around them will be joined together, widened and then the whole structure will have a second storey addition. It will be unrecognisable.
  • open grassed and garden areas will be fenced off and cosmetically landscaped in a style completely out of character with the bush environs.
  • the new buildings in the proposed Development have a new orientation that will reduce visibility to and from the historic Sydney Harbour National Park on Middle Head at the end of Middle Head Road
  • large physically and visually disruptive solid steel fire protection walls will be built to reduce bush fire risks which in itself raises a very serious question about the suitability of the site for aged care residents whose mobility is severely impaired and the emergency provisions that would be necessary to evacuate them from a dead end Headland.
  • the proposed Development would envelop both sides of Middle Head in the final approach to Sydney Harbour National Park at the end of Middle Head Road.
  • the proposed Development includes provision for a towing vehicle with a trailer to ferry meals, supplies and waste from one side of the road to the other at regular intervals every day.
  • the proposed Development includes provision for access side roads and service vehicle bays on both sides of Middle Head Road
  • the proposed Development includes provision for the widening of Middle Head Road (and the arteries from it referred to above) to allow access for ambulances (there is provision for a designated driveway and bay to be located at the section of the existing 10 Terminal building with the high roller doors.
  • it is unrealistic to expect that given the purpose and scope of the proposed Development of an Aged Care Complex that transport and traffic along the length of Middle Head Road and at the end of dead end Middle Head Road where the proposed Development is sited, will not result in significant increased in service vehicle, emergency vehicle, medical and visitor traffic.

Conclusion

We oppose without reservation both the proposed Amendment of the Harbour Trust’s Management Plan and the proposed Development of a residential aged care complex on the 10 Terminal site. We require the Harbour Trust to:

  • suspend the proposed Amendment and Development immediately
  • enlist the support of the community to urge Greg Hunt MP and Minister for the Environment NOT to approve the proposed Development of an Aged Care Complex on 10 Terminal
  • enlist the support of the community to urge Joe Hockey MP and Federal Treasurer to provide sufficient funding to allow the Harbour Trust so that it can renovate 10 Terminal, Middle Head and Platypus, Neutral Bay, to reject the proposed Development of an Aged Care Complex and thus obviate the need for the proposed Amendment to its management plan.

Yours faithfully,Marta Sengers and Michael MangoldCremorne Point

Trust's proposed amendments would permit future inappropriate development

Submissions to Sydney Harbour Federation Trust10 December 2013By Sue and Rodney BirdsallReproduced with permissionSUBMISSION TO SYDNEY HARBOUR FEDERATION TRUST REGARDING THE PROPOSED AMMENDMENTS TO THE MIDDLE HEAD MANAGEMENT PLANWe oppose all the proposed amendments as they principally relate to the development application for a residential care facility at Middle Head which we totally oppose – see our attached submission [below] regarding the development application.We disapprove also because the proposed amendments would appear to increase the ambit of the management plan to permit future inappropriate developments and loss of public space. Some examples are: on page 38 referring to replacement buildings, page 42 referring to additional structures and second storey additions, page 45 referring to enclosed garden for private use and figure 15 referring to possible visitor accommodation.SUBMISSION TO SYDNEY HARBOUR FEDERATION TRUST REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR A RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY AT MIDDLE HEADWe believe the development referred to above should not proceed for the following reasons:(a) A significant area of public land would be converted to exclusive private use. A large and obtrusive set of buildings with fenced and quarantined areas would be developed.(b) A large area of public open space would be lost – this is a huge development covering between 7½ to 10 acres. The Sydney Harbour Federation Trust (SHFT) is supposed to protect public land. If this development goes ahead the SHFT would be betraying public trust.(c) Middle Head is a much loved open space for Sydneysiders and people from all over Australia. Picnics, bush walks, a quiet and peaceful stroll down Middle Head to examine the historical forts at the end, school excursions and safe family bicycling are some of the popular pursuits. It is a quiet and peaceful area and much needed in any large city such as Sydney.(d) The impacts on the Middle Head area from the use that was explained by the developer as catering for elderly, very frail and high care residents, seem not to have been examined properly or have been under evaluated – for example visiting medicos, ambulances, security personnel, entertainers, staff, relatives and other visitors (who require parking and even it seems in some cases accommodation (figure 15 of the proposed amendments to the Middle Head Plan includes (in red): “other permissible uses including visitor accommodation in addition to offices, studios, educational or similar”). Accommodation would also be required for night-time staff in addition to the 93 units for elderly people. A huge residential facility in total. Road safety risks seem to have been ignored.(e) Whilst the financial modelling of the project has not been disclosed to the public, at a published upfront cost of $33 million and a remaining lease period of some 19 years (current lease expires in 2033) which includes project development years, the proposed project is likely to have significant financial risks which could impact on its viability both in short and medium term. The SHFT and the people of Australia could be left with a half-finished or defunct project. Very little information has been given about the developers. They have no identified experience in aged care, possibly no business experience and their presentation on site at the public meeting on Tuesday November 26th relevant question is how much of the $33 million will go to the Trust?(f) Public consultation has been last minute and extremely limited – a letter box drop to some streets in Mosman, and more recently an advertisement in the Mosman Daily newspaper. There have been no notifications in national or state newspapers, in other community newspapers or on national or local radio stations.(g) In terms of impact on local suburbs it doesn’t take much logic to work out that Middle Head Rd in Mosman will be impacted significantly as will the already overloaded roads through Mosman Junction and Spit Junction.(h) This development does not support the aims of the SHFT’s Middle Head Plan as stated:• Conserve and interpret the Commonwealth heritage values of Middle Head• Maximise public access• Facilitate adaptive reuse for ‘appropriate’ uses• Integrate the precinct with adjoining lands as part of a unified Headland Park and network of open space. (Sydney Harbour Federation Trust Management Plan – Mosman No 7 Middle head, 7 June 2007, Aims of this Plan, page 5)Nor does it support the majority of the further 12 aims on the same page.Up to now the SHFT has done a great job which is much appreciated. As a local resident we have noticed the increase in Sydneysiders as well as other Australians and tourists enjoying the area, its bush, serenity, open spaces and attractively restored heritage buildings. We urge the SHFT to continue this wonderful work and to protect the area from developments such as the one outlined in the development proposal.Sue and Rodney BirdsallMosman

Save Middle Head – a beautiful precious area – for future generations

Submission to Sydney Harbour Federation Trust10 December 2013Name withheld by requestReproduced with permissionDear Sydney Harbour Federation Trust:The following is my submission of comments regarding

  1. Draft Management Plan for Middle Head Precinct (Amendment 1), and
  2. Proposed Development – Residential Care Facility.

I oppose both the Amendment and the Proposed development.During the active debate regarding these topics in the community and on several radio shows many points have been brought up regarding the appropriateness, legality, and thoughtfulness of the Amendment and Proposed Development.While I strongly agree that these proposals go against what the Trust should be striving for, my objection is not because the renderings of the buildings are particularly unattractive or because I’m concerned about the quality of care that would be given by the proponent.  It is simply a matter of preservation of history and unique public spaces.I was never able to see the old Pennsylvania train station in New York as it was demolished in the 1960’s.  From pictures and records I can tell it was an amazing structure with a beautiful glass and steel central atrium.   I have been lucky enough though, to see Grand Central Station.  There was a time that was going to be demolished as well, but through community action, it was saved.  We rarely regret the old buildings of historical significance we keep.  The Rocks in Sydney is a great local example.There are plenty of other appropriate sites for residential care facilities to be built.  Australia has more land per capita than most countries.  However, we only have a few precious areas that are as beautiful and of as much historical significance as Middle Head and other sites managed by the Trust.  It would be a pity to begin going down the path of overdeveloping them, destroying the opportunity for future generations to experience them.My request is simple:  Look at the big picture, think long-term, and preserve this treasure we have all been handed and you have been asked to manage.Best regards,Tenant of the Trust at Georges Heights

What incentives made the Harbour Trust think blatant reversal of ideals would be ok?

Submission to Sydney Harbour Federation Trust9 December 2013Name withheld by requestReproduced with permissionDear Trustees,What are you doing?Please accept my strong opposition to the proposed development of the land that is in your trust at Middle Head - for the use of a lucrative commercial privately owned old age Facility.With an undignified haste you have tried to set in motion a scheme that can only lead to a permit for the future decimation of the wonderful heritage that is located here in Mosman.Surely you cannot in your right mind think the residents of Sydney would be happy with your silent, till now, plans to “sell off” such a large area of the land for which you are supposedly the trustee.Hopefully with the pressure from the public - that you are supposed to be looking after - you will come to your senses and reverse you decision.Finally, one can only wonder what incentives made you think this blatant reversal of the Harbour Trust ideals would be ok?Yours SincerelyName withheld by request

Middle Head Aged Care development proposal is greedy, big and conspicuous

Submission to Sydney Harbour Federation Trust11 December 2013By Bruce CunninghamReproduced with permissionDear Sir,The adapted usage of the Middle Head parklands, has to date, been exemplary. The elegance and simplicity of the existing structures is central to the success of the project.The proposed plans for the aged care facility are way out of keeping with the existing theme.*  The new buildings are in stark disharmony with the heritage structures*  The continuum structure which replaces the three 'demolished' buildings is confronting*  It's a bit greedy. Too big. Too conspicuous.Reversion to green space would be my choice. An aged care option is reasonable but would have to be scaled back to permit a dignified coexistence with the other structures ( and tenants who have shown extraordinary restraint.)Bruce CunninghamMosman

Disappointing that the Trust proposes to change the rules to accommodate a commercial developer

Submission to Sydney Harbour Federation Trust
11 December 2013
By Marion McMahon
Reproduced with permission

RE CHANGES TO THE PLAN OF MANAGEMENT

I strongly object to the changes suggested to the SHFT Plan of Management which has been engineered to accommodate one particular application for a private commercial overdevelopment at The Barracks and Terminal 10 Buildings.

The only parts that I agree are:

The proposed change to add "compliance with bushfire regulations". This is a high bushfire prone area and I am confident that the proposal will NOT get certification from the Bushfire Safety Authority, i.e. Rural Fire Service because it is an aged care facility and also a day hospital and , therefore, qualifies (twice) as "Special Fire Protection Purpose Approval" and as this is an "environmentally sensitive land" which can include land identified as being bush fire prone land.  Consequently SEPP Senior Living proposal may not be permitted on those areas". (SEE PLANNING FOR BUSHFIRE PROTECTION 2006).  This is a high level bushfire prone land and I am confident that it will not be approved by the RFS in order to protect the vulnerable residents.

The other part is "Any additional structures must not detract from the significance or views to or from the site" and "Any additional structures must not detract from the significance or views to or from the site."

The proposed development will adversely affect views to Middle Head from Middle Harbour

It is disappointing that the rules (Plan of Management) are to be changed to accommodate a commercial developer who stands to make a huge financial gain from public loss.

If the new Plan of Management and proposed development is approved, it will sully the reputation of the Harbour Trust.

Marion McMahon
Misman

Letter to Linda Bergin

Letter to Linda Bergin
11 December 2013
Reproduced with permission

Dear Ms Bergin,

My friends have informed me about the Development Application. Came as a surprise as I believed this was public land not to be used for such a large scale development.

Perhaps the only was to fight this development is to look to other uses and get support from say the Australian Museum, Botanical Gardens and Taronga Zoo.

Check out the Sydney Institute of Marine Science (at Chowder Bay) website - supported by many local Universities.

This would be an ideal site for a research centre for biodiversity in the Sydney area.

It could be set up for research and education for small mammal, reptile and insect populations in the Sydney region. There could also be a breeding programme.

There are many primary schools on the lower north shore. This would be a wonderful opportunity to set up a study centre open for small school groups.

The Botanical Gardens could be involved with planting and  information on local plant species. A name which comes to mind is Dr. Frank Talbot, a past Director of the Australian Museum who may live in Mosman. Perhaps time to get the scientists on board to come up with a proposition. This is such a perfect site and I'm sure local residents wouldn't object to the occasional bus of school children passing by.

Regards
Name withheld by request