Mod 4

I am against the removal of any trees in the Bundarra Reserve in North
Ryde.

- I object to the proposal
- The original consent approval was granted on the basis that no trees
be removed given the significance of the reserve in context of Ryde's
Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest
- With less than 0.5% left of this type of forest in the Sydney
bioregion its critical this reserve and its trees be protected
- The redesign is inappropriate and visually dominates the landscape.
In particular the bridge section is very wide at the Bundara corner

- The Modification is inconsistent with the intent of the Greater
Sydney Commission North District Plan and government's Greener Places
Policy which seeks to increase the urban canopy cover, particularly
along major roads such as Epping Road where the local community faces
increased health risks from air pollution- exhibition over Easter is
unfair to the community

Re: Modification 4 to SSD 5093 - M2 site, North Ryde Station Urban
Activation Precinct

I object to the above Modification to SSD 5093 and ask that it be
refused outright.

For many years now I have been doing bushcare in the Ryde local
government area and I appreciate the significance of the bushland in
and around Bundara Reserve.

The forest is protected under Commonwealth and State threatened
species legislation and the land is zoned for environmental protection
in the City of Ryde LEP 2014.

Modification 4 proposes a significant loss of trees, and this is much
greater than originally proposed and approved. The environmental
assessments for the original application proposed none or minimal
disturbance to Bundara Reserve.

Now it is proposed to remove 22 trees from the Reserve and adjoining
lands.

The proposed modification provides for a pedestrian bridge that is
more expensive and more grandiose than what is required and it is not
consistent with the original approval.

I also consider that the proposal to remove protected trees is not
consistent with the newly adopted Greater Sydney Commission's North
District Plan.

One of the North District Plan priorities is to increase the urban
tree canopy (not decrease it). Increasing the urban tree canopy is
important for improving amenity and air quality along major roads and
Epping Road is recognized as one of the North District's busiest.

I urge that Landcom be directed to change the bridge's alignment and
design to comply with the environmental constraints identified in the
original environmental assessment.

An improved alignment is necessary to protect the urban tree canopy
and provide better access to the cemetery and the future community
plaza areas.

- I object to the proposal

- I live in Western Sydney, where this type of forest and biodiversity
is not supported and I love the opportunities I get to enjoy the Ryde
Ironbark Forest
- The reason for clearing the trees is insignificant when compared to
the benefits and advantages of the Turpentine Ironbark Forest
- I think further future compromises of the natural environment in
this area for the purpose of urban growth, will undermine the natural
diversity and character of area.

I teach at a school in Ryde. The proposed pedestrian bridge at Bundara
Reserve crossing Delhi Road cannot necessitate the removal of so many
trees simply to "protect the structure from bird droppings and sap".
This is a ridiculous precedent - design and maintain the structure
with this in mind. I find it difficult to promote the importance of
trees on National tree Day when the local council appears not to
prioritise such aims.

I wish to lodge a strong objection to the proposed footbridge that will
impact on Bundara Reserve. As developments continue to grow in this
region, we must guard all the green space that remains,
This reserve is zoned E2 and should be properly protected.
Yours sincerely
Robyn Smith

I am opposed to the modification to Bundara Reserve as the removal of
trees for a temporary shed site & pedestrian bridge is ridiculous. We
have lost enough of our mature green space to the proposal already &
we need to protect what is left. I am a long time resident of North
Ryde & am tired of having to fight to save areas that should never
have come under threat from development. The need to maintain these
green areas not only for the community but for the wild life can never
be understated.

I am appalled at the suggestion that additional trees/bushland will need
to be disturbed just to reduce the need for maintenance on the
proposed pedestrian bridge. In particular the turpentine/ironbark
forest in the vicinity of pier 2 should not be further disturbed.

I have no faith in the offset system proposed as compensation for this
loss of vegetation. Applying a fixed sum of money into bush
regeneration elsewhere in no way compensates for permanent reduction
of an EEC.

The bridge should be allowed to stand among the trees and receive
maintenance attention if and when required.

The entire bridge project is a poor outcome for the community. No
crossing over Epping Road has been included and there is not even
provision for it to be added to this bridge at a later date. It seems
existing residents wishing to access the station don't matter. So
typically this development is all about the needs of developers and
future residents with nothing for existing residents except increased
density and congestion.

Leave the bush alone.

I oppose the modification;

I believe Bundara Reserve and adjoining E2 Zoned (environmentally
protected) land, should not be impacted upon by the pedestrian
footbridge. This is a small remnant of endangered STIF forest. This
green space will be an important amenity to the surrounding dense
urban development. The people of Sydney have the right to clean air
and green spaces...not to mention the importance to wildlife. Any
amount of bio banking compensation will not make up for the loss of
mature trees.

North Ryde is suburb that was not designed for multistory residential
housing...our infrsatructure will not cope. In addition the local
council has reviewed and rejected the application....this ruling
should stand. As a resident i do not want thjs project to be approved.

I strongly object to the removal of trees at Bundara Reserve to make way
for a footbridge. These few remaining Ironbark-Turpentine forest trees
and surrounding land are under environmental protection and zoned E2
and should therefore not be touched or impacted by the bridge. A new
solution to protect the bridge and the trees should be procured. Many
trees and open spaces have already been lost in the area to
development, we must protect the small amount that are remaining. It
is vital that some greenery be left to punctuate the concrete jungle
that is being erected, and to provide some relief for wildlife and
humans alike. Thank you.

I would contend that the need to construct the pedestrian footbridge at
this site is problematic and that other viable alternatives are
available if there is the political will to implement them.
Yet again, inappropriate overdevelopment in our suburb is being used
as the rationale to destroy precious green space, In this instance, it
is particularly concerning given the ecologically sensitive nature of
the Bundara reserve.
Environmental costs should be factored into this decision. To suggest
that the `design life' of a bridge and the mitigation of the "effect
of bird droppings on the paint life of the mild steel" should take
precedence over the protection of the environment, beggars belief.
I believe Bundara Reserve and the adjoining E2 zoned land should be
protected at all costs. I am totally opposed to the proposal to
construct a pedestrian bridge at this site.
Ruth Perram

I am opposed to the modification. I am particularly opposed to the
Modification for Tree Removal shown on pages 9 and 10 of Statement of
Environmental Effects. As shown in the photo on page 3 of the
Modification for Tree Removal, Bundara Reserve is an ecologically
sensitive 'island' of vegetation in the area. The reasons given for
removing over 10 mature trees are ridiculous and relate mainly to
reduce the amount of painting and maintenance required. I feel it is
unfair to remove more trees in this area.

I am opposed the modification and believe that the Bundara Reserve long
with the adjoining E2 Zoned land, should not be impacted upon by the
pedestrian footbridge.
It is my understanding that the area is environmentally protected and
should remain untouched. It has already been damaged by the
construction work in the area and steps should be taken to further
protect the reserve, not destroy it.

The council has already gone through a legal process and has rejected the
application. As a resident I do not want this application to proceed.

I believe Bundara Reserve and the adjoining E2 zoned land should be
protected at all costs.

I am totally opposed to any modification which would allow the
construction of a pedestrian bridge which would impact on the Bundara
Reserve site.

I object to Modification 4 to SSD 5093.

My parents have lived at Ryde for nearly sixty five years. I grew up
in their home with my siblings and wonderful neighbours. I am very
concerned about the inappropriate and excessive development but my
greatest concern is the environmental losses. This modification will
create even greater loss of canopy and habitat with 43 trees to be
removed - this modification having added 17 trees.

I am concerned that despite Council's application to extend the
consultation period, the deadline for submissions has remained
unchanged. The community needs more time to be able to look into this
proposed modification due to its impact on the environment and our
much loved suburb.

Bundara Reserve and the adjoining E2 land, should not be impacted upon
by the pedestrian footbridge.

I strongly oppose this application.

I object to the application to cut down more trees in the Bundara Reserve
in North Ryde. With high rise apartment buildings popping up like
mushrooms all over North Ryde, the last thing we need is to reduce
even further the amount of bush land we have, particularly when it is
for such a spurious reason.

Bundara Reserve and the adjoining E2 Zoned (environmentally protected)
land, should not be impacted upon by the pedestrian footbridge in
question.

I am opposed to the proposed modification. I believe that Bundara Reserve
and adjoining E2 Zoned (environmentally protected) land, should not be
impacted upon by the pedestrian footbridge.
I have been a resident of Chatwood and Ryde for over 50 years and have
driven countless times between Lane Cove Rd and Chatswood along Delhi
Road enjoying the few minutes that drive affords to be near the local
bush.
In recent times I have watched on in dismay as the bushland has been
rapidly replaced by more and more buildings, as street trees have been
removed one after the other for some modification to the road or
access. One oasis has been Bundara Reserve, shaved here and there but
proudly standing. I am now very distressed to discover that there are
plans to remove some of this precious remnant Sydney Turpentine
Ironbark Forest to accommodate a pedestrian bridge.
With the huge increase in population in the surrounding areas this
small reserve will become more and more important for the wellbeing of
the local population for whom the bridge is designed.
The original approval for the bridge stated that no trees were to be
removed from Bundara Reserve but Modification 4 proposes significant
tree removal from Bundara and lands nearby. The bridge proposed in
Modification 4 is poorly designed and located and the eight metre
encroachment is too wide at the Bundara corner.
Removing any trees from Bundara Reserve is inconsistent with the
Greater Sydney Commission North District Plan which has as one of its
priorities to increase the urban tree canopy especially along busy
roads like Epping Rd so as to improve amenity and air quality.

I believe Bundara Reserve and the adjoining E2 zoned land should be
protected at all costs. I am totally opposed to any modification which
would allow the construction of a pedestrian bridge which would impact
on the Bundara Reserve site, especially if it requires the removal of
Turpentine- Ironbark trees.