23 March 2026
North Sydney Council is set to introduce a permit and fee framework for the use of public open space, with a 21-person threshold designed to target organised and commercial activity but which will also capture larger personal gatherings such as birthday parties and family events.
North Sydney Council has moved to adopt its Commercial and Group Use of Public Open Space Policy – post-exhibition report, following a public consultation process that drew 201 submissions and significant community debate over the reach of the proposed regime.
The policy defines a “group” as more than 21 people — a trigger for permits and potential fees — despite Council stating the framework is intended to manage “organised or higher-impact activities” rather than “everyday social gatherings”. The reliance on a numerical threshold to distinguish between the two emerged as a key concern in submissions.
The practical impact will fall most heavily on a hierarchy of parks identified for pricing and regulation. These include Category 1 sites Blues Point Reserve, Bradfield Park (South), Cremorne Point Reserve (West), Clark Park, Dr Mary Booth Reserve and Quibaree Park; Category 2 sites Anderson Park, Balls Head Reserve, Capt. Henry Waterhouse Reserve, Henry Lawson Reserve, Berry Island, Cremorne Point Reserve (East), Kurraba Point Reserve, Kesterton Reserve and Sawmillers Reserve; and Category 3 sites Forsyth Park, Smoothy Park, Hodgson’s Lookout, St Leonards Park, Ted Mack Reserve and the Tunks Park foreshore.
Council has attempted to soften the reach of the threshold by maintaining free access for larger gatherings in a separate set of parks, where groups of up to 60 people will not require permits or fees. These include Anzac Park, Brennan Park, Green Park, Primrose Park, Milson Park, St Thomas Rest Park, Tunks Park (excluding the foreshore), Warringah Park and Waverton Park.
This creates a two-tier system in which identical gatherings may be free in one location but regulated in another, reinforcing that the policy is less about group size per se than managing demand in high-value or constrained parks.
Submissions raised concerns that the 21-person trigger would capture casual events such as birthday parties and informal gatherings. Council acknowledged “the strong community expectation that parks remain free, accessible, and inclusive spaces”, but maintained that increasing demand required “these shared community assets [to be] managed in a way that ensures equitable access for all users”.
The policy establishes, for the first time, a formal system to regulate commercial operators and organised groups, including fitness trainers, dog walking businesses and commercial picnics. Council argued that such activities involve “the use of publicly owned land to generate private income” and that it is “reasonable that operators contribute to the costs associated with maintaining” those spaces.
Fees themselves have not yet been set, with Council to develop and publicly exhibit a pricing schedule based on principles including scale, frequency and impact of use. Pricing is also intended to “assist Council to manage demand for limited public open space”.
The scale of the policy reflects what Council says is mounting pressure on North Sydney’s open space network. The local government area currently provides around 10.53 square metres of open space per resident. Council also pointed to rising maintenance costs, noting turf remediation can cost around $5 per square metre and that it spends approximately $7.3m annually on parks and gardens.
Set against an overall Council budget of more than $150m, the revenue potential from the proposed charges is likely to be modest. Council itself acknowledged that income generated would be “modest relative to Council’s overall expenditure.”
The policy also draws a distinction between public and non-government schools, proposing that private institutions contribute where parks are used as a substitute for on-site facilities. This element proved contentious, accounting for nearly half of submissions received during consultation, with 97 submissions opposing fees for school use of parks. Submitters argued that access to open space was critical for student health and wellbeing, particularly in dense urban areas, and warned that charges would either be passed on to families or reduce outdoor activity. Others pointed to long-standing use of local parks by schools and argued that development contributions had already been paid, while raising concerns about equity and the impact on children if access were curtailed.