Patyegarang Development
Patyegarang, previously known as Lizard Rock, is a planning proposal from the Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council (MLALC) to develop 450 homes on some bushland in Belrose on the Northern Beaches, about 20km from the Sydney CBD.
It seeks to clear 45ha of bushland to build these 450 homes, preserving bush on the remaining 30% of the site. This also includes provisions to protect two culturally significant rock carvings in the area, with viewing platforms, boardwalks and full-time staff on-site to take care of upkeep.
The MLALC is the freehold owner of the land, which was returned to them over 20 years ago under the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983. Since then they have pursued development, but have been frustrated by bureaucracy the whole time. This includes a decision from the former Warringah Council to suspend all planning proposals across the LGA for 10 years starting in 2008.
This is quite different from the usual proposals we’d advocate for two reasons: it is low-density detached housing, and it requires clearance of bushland on the urban fringe, but we think both of these are overcome by the particulars here.
Firstly, we would prefer that this development was mixed-use medium density, with enough people to support some shops and a bus route. This possibility has been ruled out by the Sydney North Planning Panel, who have arbitrarily set a cap of 450 dwellings. This is through no fault of the proponent - they are simply complying with this condition.
If we look at a map of other sites which have been returned under the Land Rights Act on the Northern Beaches, it’s clear they are all covered by bushland. This is because the Act only permits land that is not being used by the Government to be returned. We also see a pattern with other LALCs across NSW having difficulty activating their land, and even claiming it in the first place.
If we set the bar for MLALC developments at “no land clearing on the urban fringe” then that effectively frustrates the purpose of the Land Rights Act. If they cannot develop their land as they see fit then there is no self-determination. They can’t use the land to deliver housing for the Aboriginal community, and they cannot use the proceeds to deliver economic and cultural benefits.
Contrast this with examples in North America, where the Squamish Nation have been able to develop skyscrapers on land that would otherwise permit very little. That’s what self-determination looks like.
Relevantly, this development is subject to intense local opposition, with local MPs Sophie Scamps and Michael Regan, and the Northern Beaches Council all against it.
Scamps has made some pretty questionable commentary on this proposal. Last week she suggested on Twitter that opposition to this development could be the reason for a lower ‘yes’ vote than in other Teal seats.
Earlier this year her plan for the site was as follows:
I would like to see all parties reconsider a plan which would see the parcels of land owned by the MLALC in Mackellar turned into an Aboriginal Owned National Park. The former site of Waratah or Skippy Park could be turned into the gateway to the National Park as well as an Aboriginal Knowledge and Visitors Centre.
Both MPs have identified a shortage of housing in the area, which this development delivers in spades. By way of comparison, Belrose only added 46 new homes since 2011, according to Census data.
Northern Beaches Council’s page on this development seems pitched entirely at other council planners and consequently comes across as tone deaf:
The proposal does not demonstrate strategic merit and is inconsistent with key aspects of the Greater Sydney Region Plan, North District Plan, Northern Beaches Local Strategic Planning Statement – Towards 2040, and Northern Beaches Local Housing Strategy
Inconsistency with Conservation Zones reform – The reform recommends applying a C3 Environmental Management Zone to most of the site
Notes that the homes would be “surplus to any housing targets”
All of this sounds like they are saying “we have plans for our LGA and Land Rights are an inconvenience to us”. Councils do not view themselves as having a moral responsibility to deliver enough housing supply to address affordability, except through the targets allocated to them by the state government.
Call to action
We encourage you to write to the Planning Department to have your say on this proposal. It is vitally important that developments by Aboriginal Land Councils get a fair hearing, and that we have a set of standards that does not effectively prohibit them from developing housing for their community.
You can make a submission here before 7 November.
