Newsletter 71 – Conserving Rare Open Space
- Posted by IanMuttonAdmin
- On December 1, 2025
Newsletter Number 71 – December 2025 Updated – February 2026 CONSERVING RARE OPEN SPACE North Sydney has one of the most constrained parkland and recreation area ratios in metropolitan Sydney — approximately 550 residents per hectare of open space. By comparison, Ku-ring-gai has around 84 residents per hectare, Willoughby 216, and Mosman 170, highlighting the […]
Read More
 with the passage of the Luna Park Site Act (the Act).
The Act’s stated objective is
<em>Returning the Luna Park Site to the people of NSW and to ensure that Luna Park and its associated harbor foreshore remain accessible for the enjoyment of the people of NSW.</em>
The Government, recognising the iconic status of Luna Park, set up the Luna Park Reserve Trust to protect it – a critical element because the intention was to turn the operation of Luna Park over to the private sector.
At the time, the Minister for Tourism and Minister for Lands and Forests, on behalf of Mr Greiner, said:
<em>If the trustees (Luna Park Reserve Trust) conclude that a fun fair is not viable then turning the site into parkland is a possibility.</em>
The Act called for the Trust to put in place a Plan of Management which it did in 1998.
That Plan of Management in part reads:
<em>The Luna Park Site .. includes land on the cliff top which is physically and perpetually separate from the amusement areas. The Act now also allows the development of this land for commercial purposes. The development would be undertaken by the private sector on the basis of long-term lease from the Luna Park Reserve Trust. Revenue generated from this source would be used by the Trust in managing the Luna Park Reserve …</em>
<strong>A new era.</strong>
In 2004 the Luna Park Site was leased to Luna Park Sydney (now under the Brookfield umbrella).
What was done to extract value from the assets? It’s hard to work it out.
Back in 2005 our (then) local member, Mrs Skinner said in a debate in the House of Assembly:
<em>“Luna Park developers have been provided with four key sites on the foreshores of Sydney Harbour for the peppercorn rents of $1 each, that is, $4 for four key sites. They have made a motza anticipated to be $41 million out of the development of those sites.”</em>
That seems to not have been enough - in 2009-11 the Auditor questioned whether Luna Park could continue as a “going concern”.
More recently it sub-leased/forfeited the lease on the cliff top land resulting in total upfront payments to Luna Park of $8.2m
Luna Park is closing down its function operation – the fixed costs will have to be carried by the operation of the rides.
Clearly, a theme park is a hard business but with Luna Park we are dealing with one of Sydney’s icons.
So, what now? – We hear there is a review of operations.
<strong>Let’s pause for a moment.</strong>
When Luna Park entered into the lease it was covenanting that it would be the custodian of the Park until the end of the lease.
If Luna Park is not financially viable with its present configuration, the time may have come to turn the site into parkland in the manner foreshadowed back in 1990 and preserve what remains of the intra war theme park – preserving and keep operational the heritage rides.
Perhaps that’s something the Government, Brookfield and the community can come together and deliver.
Ian Mutton
<span id=){kind=link}
 in the (1976) film, Network
<img class='size-full wp-image-859 alignleft' src='https://www.ianmutton.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/peter-finch.jpg' alt='' width='244' height='183' />
Just like Peter Finch
“I’m as mad as hell ..”
.. but for me the cause is being ignored by the State Government; watching it plunder our open green space – even worse, watching our community being taken for granted and our assets trashed.
One of the things COVID taught us is how much we need to value our open spaces—a crucial public amenity where people can relax, exercise, play and enjoy the natural environment and in North Sydney we have just about the lowest ration of open green space to residents compared to any city local government area.
We are under attack by the State Government – eight examples
<strong>First – The First Sydney Harbour Road Tunnel</strong>
<img class='size-full wp-image-858 alignnone' src='https://www.ianmutton.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/sydney-harbour-road-tunnel.jpg' alt='' width='282' height='179' />
In 1987 the State Government legislated to take ownership of the Southern end of Bradfield Park to facilitate the building of the tunnel – the land was to be returned on completion. The land remains to be returned to North Sydney Council.
<strong>Second - Berrys Bay Foreshore</strong>
<img class='size-full wp-image-756 alignnone' src='https://www.ianmutton.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Picture-5.jpg' alt='' width='282' height='176' />
Second there’s Berrys Bay - back in 2017 our Premier undertook to make the land on the western side of Berrys Bay available to our community. A month later, the Member for North Shore (F Wilson) spoke in support of the Premier’s undertaking – in her maiden speech.
The State Government is still talking about it – not delivering!
<strong>Third Waverton Bowling Green</strong>
<img class='size-medium wp-image-849 alignnone' src='https://www.ianmutton.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/waverton-bowling-club-300x220.jpg' alt='' width='300' height='220' />
Third – Waverton Bowling Green; it could have, should have passed to North Sydney Council for re-inclusion into Waverton Parklands. The State Government’s dithering opened the Waverton Bowling Green up to a claim by the Metropolitan Land Council and saw it lost to our community.
<strong>Fourth the Sydney Harbour HighLine</strong>
<img class='alignnone size-medium wp-image-562' src='https://www.ianmutton.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/highline-concept-small-300x168.jpg' alt='' width='300' height='168' />
Fourth - the Sydney Harbour HighLine (walkway from Waverton to Lavender Bay) was promised by the Premier in 2017 following the recommendations of the very Committee she set up that was chaired by Felicity Wilson.
Andrew Constance, when a State Government minister, “paused” the project and then resigned – now the State Government is not even talking about when it will be delivered.
<strong>Fifth - Cammeray golf course</strong>
<img class='alignnone size-medium wp-image-855' src='https://www.ianmutton.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/golf-course-cammeray-300x225.jpg' alt='' width='300' height='225' />
The Cammeray golf course has been sacrificed to the needs of the Western Harbour and Beaches’ tunnels and the Warringah Freeway expansion – our community loses 1.5 hectares of open green space and gets nothing in return and gets nothing in return – <a href='https://www.ianmutton.com/2021/05/21/north-shore-community-newsletter-26-parks/'>Newsletter 26</a>
<strong>Sixth – The High Street “interchange”</strong>
Another loss to the needs of the Western Harbour and Beaches’ tunnels and the Warringah Freeway expansion.
Another tree eradication program brought to us by the State Government
<strong>Seventh Wendy’s “secret” Garden</strong>
<img class='alignnone size-medium wp-image-753' src='https://www.ianmutton.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Picture-2-300x169.jpg' alt='' width='300' height='169' />
It’s on borrowed time!
The best the Government has been prepared to do is grant a lease for 30 years (with an option) – unless something is done at the end of the lease the Garden can be claimed by the Metropolitan Land Council.
We need a State Government that’s prepared to protect it for ever.
<strong>Eighth - Bradfield Park being carved up by Transport for NSW to build a ramp for bikes</strong>
The State Government is confronted with a problem – how to get bikes up to and down from the cycleway on the Sydney Harbour Bridge.
It has options – both meet the design standards for bike ramps
One:
<ul>
<li>Requires the removal of no trees (the other, on the left, the removal of 8 trees)</li>
<li>Has a zero footprint on Bradfield Park (the other, on the left, is a 200m by 4m concrete velodrome)</li>
<li>Results in the loss of no parking space (the other, on the left, requires the removal of 23 parking space from Alfred Street).</li>
</ul>
<img class='size-medium wp-image-854 alignleft' src='https://www.ianmutton.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/cycle-ramp-map-158x300.jpg' alt='' width='158' height='300' />
Which one do you think the State Government has chosen
• the one that hardly interferes with Bradfield Park or
• the one that runs through the park and across the entrance to the railway station (aptly described as a scar across our Mona Lisa) and sees the removal of trees and parking spaces?
The solution put forward by the community
<img class='alignnone size-medium wp-image-853' src='https://www.ianmutton.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/community-ramp-300x168.png' alt='' width='300' height='168' />
<strong>Conclusion</strong>
The time has come to push back against the State Government and our local member at every opportunity.
Our attempts to work with the State Government have yielded not a brass razoo and cost our community a lot of open green space.
Time to write to our State representative, Felicity Wilson, and tell her what you think about her performance.
Ian Mutton
<span id=){kind=link}