School enrolments

cps_area_mapThere are two public schools within West Ward – Chatswood and Mowbray. Every child is entitled to be enrolled in a public school.

Schools have what is known as an ‘enrolment area’ (refer to the map of Chatswood PS enrolment area on the left). You are entitled to  attend the school if your home is within the specified enrolment area. If the school is full, demountables will be used to cater for increased enrolments.

The catchment for Mowbray PS is shown on the right.  Please note that these catchments may mowbraycatchment.JPGchange. So be sure to consult the school or its website directly about enrolment entitlement.

Mowbray Public School has recently been expanded from a few hundred students to cater for up to 1,000 students. New enrolments at the school are largely coming from the new units on the Lane Cove Council side of Mowbray Rd. There have been gossip that the enrolment area boundary between Chatswood PS and Mowbray PS might change at some point. So again, refer directly to the school for enrolment advice.

This entry on school enrolments has been established to monitor any changes to school enrolment areas. The information in this article should not be relied on in determining your enrolment entitlement.


One thought on “School enrolments

  1. A local resident has made the following observations about this development:

    Council’s website lists 688-692 Pacific Highway, Chatswood – Planning Proposal 2015/3
    as Item 18.5 on the Agenda 14 December 2015.

    Although the present buildings are very non-descript, I am writing to outline my central concerns at the proposal in its current form.

    I believe this is a critical decision for Council on Monday night.

    The report attached by Ingham Planning addresses what is the major implication of this proposal in overturning current height restrictions on the western side of the Pacific Highway.

    “whether it is an appropriate strategy to permit high rise development of this type on the western side of the Highway and whether permitting a development of this type in this location will establish a precedent that will open the doors for other similar developments along the western side of the Highway”

    It then quotes favourably the Urban Design report:
    “the previous approach of allowing the Pacific Highway to provide a natural demarcation between the CBD and its surrounds was sensible, practical and manageable.

    It further favourably quotes Kennedy and Associates Architects:
    “we think council need to be very careful in their assessment of this development.”
    and that if supported,
    “will have immediately redefined the urban character of Chatswood for the entire extent of the highway between at least Freeman Rd and Railway St, and potentially much further.”
    and finally summarises thus:
    “this is the key urban design question raised by this planning proposal.”

    The response given to these concerns is that it is “an island site” with little implications for other sites along the CBD strip of the Pacific Highway, none of which offer opportunity for development.
    This argument is disingenuous. Planning decisions are not made in relation to the current development possibilities, but as controls which intend to achieve a present and future outcome.
    The circumstances in relation to the other sites named will change in future years. I have witnessed during my lifetime two developments take place on the Toyota site alone.

    Erecting an 11 storey (plus podium) high rise building on the western side of the CBD on the Pacific Highway will crush the long standing principle established by Council and confirmed in practice since development at Chatswood first began in 1968.

    It is the first step towards creation of a forbidding “tunnel effect” for travellers, where at present buildings to the west are unimposing and let in evening light to the Highway.

    The Pacific Highway must remain as an important natural demarcation of high rise development, without any compromise.

    I am informed by Chatswood West Ward Progress Association minutes that a former General Manager and another member of Council are involved with this development proposal. I believe this information should be made public in the interests of transparency.

    Aqualand’s website in relation to this project speaks volumes in relation to my concerns, both in its wording and image chosen.

    The major heading here by Aqualand in promoting this development is:


    The image used of the CBD shows (perhaps unintentionally?) a clear demarcation formed by the Pacific Highway.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s