Unfortunately a family event in the UK prevented President Lesley Lynch from attending the Society's Annual General Meeting held at Benledi on 29 August, 2010.

To read her report on the past year, click here.

The Central Sydney Planning Committee and the Council of the City of Sydney have agreed to zoning proposals for Harold Park. The outcome, confirmed at a meeting of full Council on Monday, 26 July 2010, was not all that we would have wished for, but far more favourable than might have been the case if proposals put forward by the current owner, the NSW Harness Racing Club, had been accepted. The next move will by up to the Club which can accept the City's decision or ask the Minister for Planning to intervene on its behalf.

President Lesley Lynch and Planning Convenor, Neil Macindoe, write:

Last week we sent out calls to Glebe Society members and residents to show their support for the community position on the future of Harold Park at the Council Planning Committee and the Central Sydney Planning Committee(CSPC)  meetings. The response was terrific and neither gathering was in any doubt as to the community’s views or to the strength of feeling on the matter.

We had three formal Glebe Society speakers at both meetings (Lesley, Neil and John Gray) and numerous others spoke on an individual basis. The Club had two speakers. There was consistent support from residents for the overall Glebe Society position expressed through our community resolution and Harold Park principles document.

The Wins
The effort was worth it. While we have ongoing issues with the Council’s draft controls, they did incorporate many of our core principles and as such are a major win for the community. Most significantly, they will deliver us:

• 35% or 3.9 hectares of the site as public open space. This must be continuous and incorporate a full size sport field and a public garden
• Recognition of the heritage status of the Tramsheds and a requirement that they be adaptively restored. 500 square metres of the restored Tramsheds is to be transferred to Council for community uses
• Land sufficient for 50 units of public housing is to be made available at no cost,

We wanted other changes to the draft, but given all the pressures and the broad political context, it was a relief that both the Council and the CSPC endorsed these critical elements which go a considerable way towards protecting the public interest in this site and constraining the drive for maximum windfall private profit from the site. We have expressed our appreciation to Council for its efforts to date.

However, there are two very big reasons why we cannot yet relax. We need to fight for further changes and there is, as of yet, no guarantee that the decisions made by Council/CSPC last week will not be over-ridden by the Minister.

Unresolved Concerns
The draft proposals fall short of our HP principles on a number of critical points:

• We are opposed to the height of the buildings at the perimeter of the site (up to 8 stories) and consider a better configuration is possible
• We are concerned that the current controls will allow large scale retail/commercial activity ( a major super market/retail complex) which would be devastating for our local retail centres and for impact on traffic
• We continue to argue that the public open space would be better located if it was not all on the Glebe side (including a 42-8 metre buffer along the cliff) and connected better with Forest Lodge and the existing parks
• We continue to think the traffic study significantly underestimates the impact on surrounding roads.

As it seems – at this stage – unlikely that we can convince the State Government to acquire the Tramsheds in toto, we are arguing that the dedicated space for community activities needs to be increased from 500 square metres to at least 1000square metres. This is reasonable given the overall floor space of 7500 square metres.

We presented all these points at the meetings. We have a commitment that the planning controls will be amended to:

• leave open the final configuration of the open space – as long as it meets the stated criteria;
• prohibit large scale block retail activity;

and that:

• further traffic impact modelling will be done to incorporate Saturday traffic flow;
• the increase of community space in the Tramsheds to 1000 square metres will be considered

We got no movement on the heights of the buildings. Staff presented a written response to our arguments on this (and a number of other points). Essentially they argued that good design could dramatically reduce the visibility and impact of 8 stories to simulate 6 stories and that this range of heights was essential to maintain the density. The density (now 1200 units) is argued as necessary to meet state and council residential targets in the inner city.

Potential threats in the process
We have moved through an important, but preliminary and non-binding, stage of the rezoning process. The Council and the CSPC have endorsed draft planning controls for the rezoning of Harold Park. Before these can go to the Minister for approval to move to the next stage, the Pacing Club has to agree with the proposals.

At this point they have refused to do this. They continue to argue for less open space, greater  density and for the inclusion of the land required for affordable housing into the open space allocation. They refute our argument that they should not be entitled to a windfall development profit from the Tramsheds part of the site.

If they don’t accept the controls as endorsed by Council/CSPC, they have the option of going directly to the Minister and asking him to intervene. The Minister then has the option of agreeing to intervene on behalf of the Club or of declining.

We must await the outcome of  further negotiations between Council/CSPC and the Pacing Club. Hopefully, if no voluntary agreement is reached,  the current Minister will respect the Council/CSPC processes and the very strong community opposition to Ministerial intervention – as Kristina Keneally did when she was asked to take control of the process last year.

As we understand it, these are the possible outcomes:

• the Club will come to agreement with the Council/CSPC position and the proposals will go to the Minister. He can amend them. He will approve them to go on public exhibition for 28 days during which we can comment futher. After that Council will consider feedback and peocedd to make the final controls
• The Club does not agree. The Council will not proceed further. The Pacing Club  asks the Minister to intervene and change the controls and/or take over the rezoning a Part 3 process. The Minister may or may not act on this.

The best outcome for us is that the process proceeds under the aegis of the Council /CSPC. In that case we could expect the public exhibition stage to be in September.

If there is no agreement with the Pacing Club and the Minister does not accede to any request to intervene, the Council will not rezone the site. Nothing will happen – at least until the State election.

The worst case scenario for the community is that the Minister agrees to intervene- now or after the election. Then folks it is battle stations.

Of course once the site is rezoned, the Pacing Club has to find a buyer and then we will have a DA process to go though…..and that will almost certainly open up the design, density and building height issues … so don’t go away yet!

While we wait to see which of the above scenarios we are confronted with, the Harold Park working group will do some more intensive work to substantiate our arguments on the unresolved issues. 

The President of the Glebe Society, Dr Lesley Lynch, sent the following email to members on Sunday, 18 July:

Dear Glebe Society members

With apologies for the length- this message provides:

• an update on the HP rezoning process;

• a summary of our current response to the rezoning proposal;

• an outline of what action the Glebe Society will take over the next week; and

• a call to each of you to take some action – (see below for detail)

Update on the Rezoning Process

On Thursday the City of Sydney Council (COS) posted the proposed draft planning controls for Harold Park and updated technical reports on its website (click on this link to read the papers).

The process will now move very fast.

These drafts controls will go to the CoS Planning Committee on Monday and to the Central Sydney Planning Committee (CSPC) on Wednesday and then to full Council on Monday 29 July. If the controls are approved, they go to the Minister for Planning for consideration and, if approved, go on public exhibition. We would then have a further opportunity to comment.

If however, the draft controls are not agreed to by the CSPC or the Minister, responsibility for the rezoning of the site will automatically be referred to the Minister for decision as a Part 3 process.This is an outcome we have been very keen to avoid as it effectively cuts the community out of the process.

We understand the Pacing Club will be strongly opposing the Council proposals.

The Political Context

Next week’s critical consideration of the Harold Park proposals will be conducted in the context of a threatening State Government surprise review of the CSPC. We share the widespread apprehension that this review is intended to further reduce the planning powers of the CoS and further shut out the community. One can  only speculate as to why this review is being rushed through so close to the state election. (See analysis by Elizabeth Farrelly SMH 16/7/2010 ,p13 )

The challenge for us in this threatening context, is to find the best ways of fighting for good planning outcomes in the HP redevelopment while defending what we have left of institutions which allow the community access to the decision making process.

While we do not agree with some very important aspects of the current proposal for HP, we do not see the CoS as the main threat to the community in this process. We will be defending the role of the COS and the CSPC in the planning for our city and arguing they should have a stronger role. We remain opposed to the Part 3 powers which allow the Minister to override community and local government views. We know the Council has invited and considered the views of its community. We have no confidence that this will be the case if the rezoning goes to the Minister.

TGSI Response to the Draft Planning Controls

The community got it largely right and the principles submitted by the Glebe Society provide a fair and reasonable basis for the rezoning of the HP and Tramsheds site.

It is clear that the CoS has considered our public resolution and principles and it has responded positively to many of them. We welcome:

• The dedication of 35%  of the site as open public space with a requirement that it be continuous and incorporating a full size sports field;
•  The requirement for at least 50 units of public housing to maintain diversity in our community
• The designation of the Tramsheds as a heritage item and the requirement that 500m²   of floor space be allocated to CoS for community uses.

However the draft controls fall short of the community principles on a number of major points. Our major objections relate to the following:

• The height of the buildings at the perimeters of the site. There was a strong view that the buildings should not be higher than the cliff face or the adjacent residences. This still allowed CoS to achieve a reasonable density though different distribution of building heights on the site
• The allocation of the public open space entirely on the Glebe side of the site incorporating a buffer between the cliff face and the new high rise buildings. We have argued strongly for a link with the existing open spaces and for the bulk of the open space to be along the canal side of the site
• We are not convinced the implications of the traffic that will flow from the increase of 20% in the density (from 1000 to 1200 residential units) has been given sufficient consideration. If the development includes large scale commercial/retail activities this would greatly exacerbate the traffic problems.
• While supporting significant residential development on the HP site as appropriate given the pressure for inner city housing, we will continue to argue against over-development of the site for a host of sound environmental and amenity reasons. To the extent that this increased density and building height is driven by the wish of the Pacing Club to generate a greater profit windfall, we do not think it justified.

The Club gained the publicly owned Tramsheds site with public money so they could build what they claimed were urgently needed stables. These never eventuated and the Tramsheds were allowed to fall into great disrepair.The clear community preference is that the heritage Tramsheds part of the site be restored to the public and community use by reimbursing the Pacing Club for the sum they paid – rather than a windfall development profit. This would be a fair outcome which would still provide the Club with a handsome profit for the benefit of its members.  

The allocation of 35% of the site to public open space and 500m²  of the Tramsheds to community use goes someway to achieving this.

Next Steps

The Glebe Society will register to speak at the Planning Committee meeting on Monday and the CSPC meeting on Wednesday. We will nominate three or four speakers so we can put Forest Lodge and Annandale perspectives as well as our general argument.

What you can do

We urge you to email your responses to Councillors before midday on Monday. Core issues are: 35% public space; buildings no higher than cliff face or adjacent residences and no windfall profit from the Tramsheds site – and general support for the COS and CSPC processes as opposed to Part 3.  Click here for a list of councillors of the City of Sydney.

If you can attend these meetings your presence supporting the Glebe Society position will be very important.

You can ask to speak at the meetings, and you have a right to do so if you put in a submission. You must do this by noon on Monday by registering with Council's Secretariat Unit  9265 9310.

As it is quite possible that these draft controls will not be supported next week, we also urge you to send emails and/or phone Verity Firth, the Premier and the Planning Minister as well as the leader of the opposition and the shadow planning minister. The relevant email addresses are:

• Verity Firth: balmain@parliament.nsw.gov.au, or office@firth.minister.nsw.gov.au
• Premier: Kristina Keneally, premier@nsw.gov.au
• Minister for Planning: Tony Kelly, sharon.armstrong@lpma.nsw.gov.au
• Leader of the Opposition, Barry O’Farrell: LOP@parliament.nsw.gov.au
• Shadow planning minister, Brad Hazard: brad.hazzard@parliament.nsw.gov.au

Relevant documents are on the Glebe Society website (click here for links). We will keep the site up to date with developments.

We are at a critical point in this process. Hope to see quite a few of you at the meetings.

Regards

Lesley Lynch
President
The Glebe Society Inc

18 July 2010

These links give access to important documents relevant to the consideration by the Council of the City of Sydney (CoS), the Central Sydney Planning Committee, and the Minister for Planning of the draft planning controls for Harold Park.

Click here for papers to be considered by the City Council's Planning Committee on Monday, 19 July.

Click here to read a table giving Council's response to the Glebe Society's submission/principles.

Click here to read the Council's news release issued on 15 July 2010.

Click here to view an illustration of the proposed zoning and design.

The following are email addresses for political leaders who you may wish to contact about Harold Park.

• Verity Firth: balmain@parliament.nsw.gov.au, or office@firth.minister.nsw.gov.au
• Premier: Kristina Keneally, premier@nsw.gov.au
• Minister for Planning: Tony Kelly, sharon.armstrong@lpma.nsw.gov.au
• Leader of the Opposition, Barry O’Farrell: LOP@parliament.nsw.gov.au
• Shadow planning minister, Brad Hazard: brad.hazzard@parliament.nsw.gov.au

Click here for names and contact details for councillors of the City of Sydney.

 Sydney City Council issued the following news release on 15 July 2010 

Rezoning of Harold Park must include public benefits

More than a third of the Harold Park Paceway site in Glebe could become publicly accessible open space as part of draft planning controls developed by the City of Sydney.

The draft planning controls, to be considered by Council, include 3.9 hectares of parkland with controls allowing for a sports field, walking paths and a cycle link to Johnston’s Creek and the Glebe foreshore.

“The overwhelming feedback from the local community was to create publicly accessible open space, and that’s what we are doing. We want to guarantee that at least 35 per cent of the site will be public open space,” CEO Monica Barone said.

“This is an opportunity to provide public open space and needed housing, new jobs, sustainable transport and conserve the heritage of this important site.”

Ms Barone said the controls facilitate the restoration of the historic Tram Sheds and allocate 500 sqm of floor space for community uses within the Tram Sheds.

The proposal provides for a balanced development of 1,200 dwellings, including at least 50 affordable housing units. The buildings will be 3-8 storeys in height, which is no higher than the cliff top 2-3 storey terrace houses in Glebe. A maximum floor space ratio has been proposed at 1.2:1 across the entire site.

The proposal balances community needs and amenity while helping the City to meet residential and worker targets set by the State Government.

“The City is committed to working with the community on this project and consulted with locals to help determine opportunities and constraints for the site.”

"During extensive consultation the community told us they wanted improved local village facilities, new open space, protection for the historic Tram Sheds and opportunities for the development to be sustainable. This is what we hope to deliver," said Ms Barone.

Access to the Jubilee Park light rail station will be improved, giving residents a valuable and sustainable transport option.

The site could also make a significant contribution to the City’s employment targets, creating around 520 new jobs.

Ms Barone said the report recommends proceeding with the rezoning only if the land owner commits to providing significant public benefits “If we can agree on open space, affordable housing and community facilities as part of a Planning Agreement, then Council will seek permission from the State Government to place the draft planning controls on public exhibition. The community will then have another opportunity to have their say.”

The draft planning controls will be considered at Central Sydney Planning Committee on 22nd July and by Council on 26th July.

The Glebe Society is now able to say it has a strong and widely supported community position on acceptable development for the Harold Park and Tramsheds site.

This is set out in a resolution which rejects the proposal put forward by the Government Architect’s Office (GAO) in February and proposes, instead, 15 principles designed to address widespread concerns with that proposal.  These principles establish a bottom line from which we will assess future proposals and around which we will campaign as hard, and as long, as is necessary.

Because the future development of Harold Park and Tramsheds site is of such importance to our community and to the City, we wanted a robust and inclusive process through which we could develop a credible response to the GAO proposal.  We also need lots of local engagement in, and support of a consensus community position, if we are to be successful in influencing the final outcomes.

For these reasons we took a developing draft resolution on Harold Park and the Tramsheds to three meetings of Glebe, Forest Lodge and Annandale residents over the last two weeks.

A meeting of Glebe Society members was held at Benledi on 8 April with around 40 to 50 attending.  This meeting allowed members to assess the emerging Glebe Society position before it was more widely tested in the community.  It was a very constructive discussion and led to a few clarifying amendments to the principles.

I accepted an invitation from Jamie Parker to speak at a public meeting held by the Greens at Forest Lodge School on 12 April.  This meeting also had a very respectable attendance of around 130 residents.  I distributed copies of the Glebe Society resolution and highlighted some of the most significant issues.  Again, it was a very constructive meeting with a high degree of consensus emerging on core issues.  The Greens announced a set of six principles they wanted adopted by Sydney Council.  As these were all covered by the broader Glebe Society resolution, Jamie Parker moved that the meeting endorse the Glebe Society position.  As there had only been time to discuss some of the principles, this became a unanimous ‘in principle’ endorsement.  Participants were also invited to send comments to the Glebe Society, and many did.

Several amendments were made to the resolution on the basis of the views put forward at this meeting – most significantly relating to widening the traffic study and ensuring it included the impact on the Wigram Road/Booth Street intersection and a stipulation that any commercial/retail development in the Tramsheds be small scale and in harmony with the shopping strips in Glebe and Annandale.

The third public meeting was convened by the Glebe Society at St Scholastica’s on 21 April and around 200 attended.  The importance of this meeting was signalled by the presence of our local member Verity Firth who contributed to discussion as well as the Mayor of Leichhardt, Jamie Parker, who arrived for the latter part –having been at a Leichhardt Council meeting.  Meredith Burgmann was there for the City of Sydney as were several of the planning staff.

There was a high degree of consistency across the three meetings.  The Glebe Society’s public meeting was conducted a little more formally because it was the intent to finalise endorsement of the resolution.  This included putting a few issues to the vote.

One important matter on which a vote was taken related to the inclusion of affordable housing (for teachers, nurses, bus drivers etc).  The Glebe Society position of strong advocacy for this was overwhelmingly supported.  It would be a great loss to our community if such people are effectively forced out of the inner city and this part of Glebe.  Fortunately provision for affordable housing is City of Sydney, NSW and Federal government policy so this seems to be an achievable outcome at Harold Park.

The proposals around height of buildings, density, amount and configuration of open space, traffic impact and exclusion of large scale retail/commercial activities were all supported – albeit with a number of clarifying amendments.  We have put a lot of thought into designing a set of workable principles that will together reduce the height of building to acceptable levels both along the cliff face and the other perimeters, reduce the proposed density and deliver on a reasonable quantum of new public open space.

While a small number of people have argued for 100% of the site being declared public open space, a large majority supported our current proposal that at least 35% be formally dedicated public open space under the management of the City of Sydney.  We have argued this more modest target, not only because we think it realistic and attainable, but also because we think it a fair and appropriate balance between our need for more parks and playing fields and the pressure for more housing in the desirable inner city areas such as Glebe.  This will provide just over 3.6 hectares of public open space as well as allowing for considerable additional housing.

Some ideas and concerns could not be translated into workable principles (eg some concerns about height of buildings and traffic flow) but can be addressed at the later DA stage of the City’s planning process.

There was lively discussion of our argument, expressed in principle 9, that the heritage Tramsheds should be restored to public and community use by reimbursing the Club for what they paid ($2.2m) suitably adjusted for inflation.  It is clear that there is overwhelming support for the argument that it is fair and reasonable proposition – given the particulars of the means of acquisition and subsequent neglect of the Tramsheds .

This is a complex issue and will require careful work if it is to be progressed successfully.  We will be having further discussion with the City of Sydney and the NSW Government to explore options for the Tramsheds site.

We will now send these principles formally to the City of Sydney and generally publicise them.  We expect the Council to exhibit its draft planning controls around September.  We will assess them against these principles and campaign for changes if the planning controls do not measure up to this community bottom line.

As we expect a lengthy campaign extending to the DA stage after the site is sold, and as many residents have indicated their interest in developing options for future uses of the Tramsheds, the Glebe Society will maintain a network sharing information and ideas for those who attended the public meeting – as well as of course its members.

- Lesley Lynch, April 2010

Resolution agreed at public meeting at St Scholastica’s, Glebe, 21 April, 2010

This public meeting of Annandale, Forest Lodge and Glebe residents rejects the proposal put forward by the Government Architect’s Office on 17 and 20 February, 2010, and requests a complete review of the controls for Harold Park implied in that proposal so that it includes the following objectives and related planning principles:

Objective One: Acceptable density and building height

Planning principles

1. Limit building to the height of the cliff face at any point, or, in the case of the perimeter, to the height of adjacent buildings (excluding the height of the cliff in the Crescent)

2. Reserve at least 35% of the site as publicly owned, formally dedicated Public Open Space managed by the City of Sydney Council. (The Tramsheds are not part of this 35%)

3. Limit population density to what can be accommodated by building to the reduced height on the remaining 65% of the site.

Objective two: Environmentally sustainable, high-quality design

Planning Principles

4. Make all development, including the renovated Tramsheds, sustainable and energy efficient, and protect privacy, views and amenity.

5. Build all dwellings outside the 100-year flood limit.

6. Restore the Heritage-listed Tramsheds and forecourt to include (for example) community uses, gardens and bird habitat. Any commercial/retail uses are to be small scale and in harmony with uses in Annandale and Glebe shopping strips.

7. Make provision for affordable housing.

8. Hold a design competition at the DA stage to ensure a creative, best practice, environmentally sustainable result. The judging panel is to include community representatives.

9. The Tramsheds- the heritage centrepiece of the site – are to be restored to public and community use by reimbursing the Pacing Club for money paid by them for its acquisition.

Objective three: Attractive, Usable Public Open Space

Planning principle

10. Design the 3.67 hectares (35% of the site) of Public Open Space to: visibly and coherently connect with other existing and proposed open space (including proposed open space on the Crescent and the Hill); be safe and secure; be sunny with minimal overshadowing, and to include active recreational areas (including an all purpose playing field)

Objective four: Safe, easy access, improved connections and minimised additional traffic impact on  surrounding streets

Planning principles

11. Vehicular access is to be via a reopened Canal Road and a new intersection at Minogue Crescent. Vehicular access is, under no circumstance, to be across parkland. Fully assess the wider traffic impacts, including the Wigram Road and Booth Street intersection in Annandale.

12. Improve connections with surrounding areas.

13. Encourage easy access for pedestrians and cyclists.

14. Provide adequate and appropriately located onsite parking, (including for bicycles) for residents and visitors to the site. Do not issue street parking permits to residents of the site.

15. Upgrade public transport, including access to light rail, and establish integrated ticketing.

This resolution will be forwarded to the City of Sydney Council immediately for consideration in the development of draft planning controls for Harold Park. We expect these planning controls to be publicly exhibited in September or soon thereafter. We will assess them against these community developed objectives and principles and respond appropriately.

Dr Lesley Lynch
President
The Glebe Society Inc
23 April 2010

To assist residents to understand the site better Janice Cave, a Society member and President of the Save Rozelle Bay committee, has volunteered to lead a walking tour of the site and its surroundings. Note that not all parts of the site are accessible.

If you want to join the tour please phone Janice on 9692 0604 and turn up at the north end of Johnston Street, Annandale, at the intersection with Chapman Road, at 10 am on Saturday, 8 May. There is a parking area adjacent to the children’s playground off Chapman Road.

The Glebe Society Management Committee has called two meetings to discuss the future of Harold Park.

1. Tuesday, 8 April, at 6:30 pm at Benledi: This will be a meeting of Society members held to decide the Society’s position. As you will recall, the City Council has held several meetings, culminating in presentations on a concept for Harold Park developed by the Government Architect. This plan has not been greeted with a great deal of enthusiasm.

The Harold Park Working Party, chaired by Neil Macindoe, has identified a number of principles (see below) for the future development of Harold Park. It is proposed that these should form the basis of discussion and a resolution agreed by Society members.

2. Wednesday, 21 April, at 6:30 pm at St Scholastica’s. This will be a public meeting open to everyone. The resolution from the Glebe Society’s members’ meeting will be put to this meeting.

The way ahead

Planning for the future of Harold Park is at an early stage, and for this reason we can hope to influence the final outcome. The steps leading to the submission of a development application are:

• A draft rezoning plan is due to go to Council in June.
• The final plan is expected to be exhibited about September 2010, allowing a final round of comments.
• Once the plan is approved and the broad planning controls are in place, the Club can sell the site and a developer can submit a detailed development application (DA). We will need to remain engaged during this entire process.

The Glebe Society believes the consultation process to date has been inadequate, mainly because a lot of essential information arrived too late or was not provided. There is time before June for the Glebe community to get together and have a better discussion of the issues, and hopefully produce a better result, and the Society is providing a forum to make this possible.

Draft Principles

1. No building should be higher than the cliff face.
2. Public Open Space should be at least one third of the site.
3. The density should be lowered in accordance with 1 & 2.
4. Access should not be across parkland.
5. Layout should encourage easy access for pedestrians and cycles.
6. Access to surrounding areas should be improved.
7. Open Space should be secure and sunny and connect with existing Open Space.
8. All development should be sustainable and energy efficient and protect privacy and amenity.
9. There should be no dwellings within the 100 year flood limit.
10. Provision should be made for affordable housing, including student housing.
11. The Tramsheds, including the forecourt, should be restored to include community use, garden and bird habitat.
12. Public transport should be upgraded and include integrated ticketing.
13. The Harness Racing Club should not profit from the sale of the Tramsheds.
14. A design competition should be held at the DA stage to ensure the most creative result.

Planning decisions to be made this year will be of major significance to Glebe and surrounding suburbs. The first relates to the future development of Harold Park and the associated Tramsheds. The second, the Bays Precinct, is less specific to Glebe but has the potential to reshape the waterfront of the inner-west. The Glebe Society encourages residents to inform themselves about what is proposed for Harold Park and give their views to the City Council.  The replacement of the trotting venue will be the biggest and most important urban development in Glebe for many years, and is an opportunity to do something imaginative with practical benefits both for Glebe and for Sydney. Follow the links below to:

• read planning convenor Neil Macindoe's report on the concept plan for Harold Park presented to community workshops recently;
• read President Lesley Lynch's appeal to Glebe residents to "have your say" on Harold Park; and
• read Lesley's report on the last meeting of the Community Reference Group on the future of the Bays Precinct, and its surprisingly positive outcomes.
• click here to email your comments on the proposed planning scheme for Harold Park to the Glebe Society.
   

  Read the rest of this entry » »