Have Your Say at TRRA!

TRRA Inc. have now opened up their website for comments from members and the public.  All comments are moderated so be a little patient, your comment will be posted as soon as we can check it.

TRRA Inc. Committee of Management want your feedback on the major issues facing the ratepayers of Port Stephens today, to guide us in producing effective relevant submissions on the the things that affect YOU.

**NB: If you wish to comment on of the issues raised in any of the current posts please use the comment box at the bottom of that post. 

If you want to respond to someone else’s post, use the comment box below it.

If you want to make a general comment or start a new thread of conversation do so under this page.

 House Rules for Comments are: HERE

19 Responses to Have Your Say!

  1. JOHN KELLY says:

    RE FINGAL BAY ACCESS ROAD.
    I believe that Route 4 ( Gan-Gan Rd to Fingal Bay via coast) is the only option worth considering. It is the only option which delivers the ostensible aims of the project, which I understand to be:
    (a) provide alternative access to Fingal Bay (and south-east Shoal Bay) in case of major fire or flood
    (b) Improve and speed up road access to Fingal Bay (and south-east Shoal Bay) during peak holiday periods
    (b) Minimise mitigation works relative to anticipated sea level rise due to climate change. ( I realise this is only relevant on a 20 year event horizon, but this project already has a 20 yr history, with zero delivered so far).

    PLEASE NOTE: I have a vested interest here – my home is potentially scheduled for acquisition if Option 1 proceeds.

    • Howard Davies says:

      I believe option 4 is the best option. It keeps all through traffic away from the centres of both Nelson and Shoal Bay.
      Option 1 would be my second choice.

  2. Fran corner says:

    I live at tanilba bay but drive to fingal bay regularly. Am I the only person who thinks the new fingal bay rd will get a lot more people to the dead end a lot faster but with great cost to the environment?

  3. george allen says:

    I completely disagree with the “Friends of Tomaree” proposed vision of the future for the Tomaree Headland. The war had to destroy this unspoilt headland now we have an opportunity to bring it back to how it once was. All the buildings should be removed and trees planted to increase the biodiversity to encourage koalas possums bandicoots and all other local wildlife. A path or cycle track could be made so visitors could see a pristine headland once more, this is what attracts visitors, we have plenty of retail and boutiques in Shoal bay and Nelson bay we do not need more. We have a WW2 museum at the inner lighthouse we don’t need more. The war is over why keep promoting it we need to promote more trees and nature in this warming world. If we need more car parks for the peak holiday times then why not extend the Zenith beach loop road, this car park is out of sight. We do not need to promote more tourism as we have plenty, currently, life becomes uncomfortable when the area is full of tourist at peak times. The buildings on the headland are 70 years old and it will cost probably millions of dollars to upkeep them and the 70 year old infrastructure. To preserve the history a state of the art 3D film could be made of the site before it is bulldozed and brought back to nature. The film could be shown in the inner light museum.

  4. george allen says:

    I would like to congratulat the TRRA on an excellent, TRRA Submission on Port Stephens Council Proposal for
    Special Rate Variation (SRV).

    My submission is as follows:-
    I wish to object to this special variation which is a posh word for a rate increase, the cost of living has skyrocketed recently, we and many others cannot afford to pay more rates, there has been a large population increase in Port Stephens over the last 5 years so, with all the extra rates the council will get from all the new buildings that have been built and are still being built, I see no reason why we should have a rate increase (they are getting increased rates by default). If projects need doing then let them be done over a longer timescale so a rate increase is not required. Tourism has also increased through winter and summer, this influx of people must also trickle down to increase money for the council. So once again I cannot understand why our current generosity to the council should be even more squeezed out of us. If a rate increase is to develop infrastructure to increase tourism then let the beneficiaries of tourism pay extra and not the general public.

  5. Al says:

    Yesterday I had large black ute back out of the parking places at Fly Point directly in front of me as I cycled up the hill in the cycle/pedestrian lane. I had to take avoiding measures including coming to a stop. He then roared off without a care. Not the first time I have had to dodge cars here.

  6. Brian Tehan says:

    I’ve written to council a couple of times about the section of Victoria Parade past Fly Point where the road is shared between vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists. It’s crazy that (1) there are no signs that it’s a shared roadway, (2) huge trucks, cars towing large vans and boats are allowed to use it, when they could use Dixon Drive – none of these large vehicles can actually fit in the road section, (3) the speed limit is 50 kmh with these vehicles less than a metre from pedestrians, people pushing prams, etc. There’s no proper demarcation between the shared path and the road and cars constantly cross onto the path with some narrow misses. I have a photo of a huge crane truck that drove down there the other day.
    It’s incredibly dangerous and it’s only a matter of time before someone is injured or killed as the traffic constantly increases.

  7. Wayne Mungoven says:

    Hi I live been living in Nelson Bay for 8 years ,my home has become surrounded by air b&b properties. Basically been used as motels. With large groups often booking houses. I would like properties signposted

  8. Yves Monnet says:

    I strongly object to the blanket 10 + storeys zoning across the whole town area,
    the Port Stephens Council is planning to introduce for the following reasons:
    1. I would like to keep the costal village ambience of the Nelson Bay town centre.
    2. There is NO proof this will increase the permanent population in Nelson Bay town centre.
    3. Most high rise apartments in town already have a vacancy rate of 70% +.
    4. The reason why more shops are vacant is due to the unrealistic rent increase by the owners.
    5. The other reason why businesses are not doing well is due to the uncertainty of the country’s economy.
    6. Most comparative coastal towns on the Eastern seaboard with a blanket 5 storey zoning are doing well.
    7. The fact that we already have real issue with parking in the town centre.

    It seems to me that Council is listening to a hand full of developers instead of thousands of their constituency who have elected them there in the first place.

  9. John Stewart says:

    Congratulations on your Meet The Candidates Forum last night. However, as two candidates for East Ward Councillors are also standing for Mayor, it would be beneficial in future to also hear from the Number 2 on their Councillor tickets, as they would be our Councillor should the Number 1 be voted Mayor. At the moment I don’t even have a clue as to who they are, what are their backgrounds, are their policies the same as the Number 1 Candidate or are they just standing as Number 2 to make up the numbers and God help us if they get elected.

    • Dick says:

      John

      Thank you for your comment, we understand your concern. However this is simple mathematics. If you divide the amount of time we have to run a forum (2.5 Hrs) by the number of candidates you will find that it is not possible to include any other than the ‘lead’ candidates, otherwise they would only get a few minutes each and very few questions from the audience. We would like to include them all but it would take more than one forum! We would suggest that you contact the ‘lead’ candidate and ask directly if you are really concerned, I am sure they will give you a response if they want your vote.
      TRRA Webmaster

  10. Beejeepers says:

    I live in Tomaree Road, Shoal Bay and am an active member in our local community. I want to know why we don’t have a footpath.

    Tomaree Road is the main road in Shoal Bay. It carries heavy traffic. Also the Port Stephens local and school bus route – with bus stops and bus shelters. The sealed surface of the road is in a deplorable condition. In spite of this vehicles are often seen speeding.

    Many of the houses in Tomaree road are holiday let and during peak periods, pedestrian traffic is extremely busy, back and forth to the beach. Families have no alternative but to put their lives at risk with strollers and children on bikes having to compete for the sealed surface.

    Car and boat trailers are often parked across the verge leaving no alternative for pedestrians but to walk on the road. Verge is very difficult to walk on due to the very uneven ground levels. Impossible to push a stroller or
    a wheelchair on.

    School children walk unsupervised from the local school down the road – like playing Russian Roulette with cars, buses weaving in and out of parked cars making for single lane traffic.

    Throughout the Port money has been spent on extensive cycle paths and footpaths often with little use. When is this road going to be upgraded and a footpath installed in Tomaree Road, Shoal Bay.

    Shoal Bay is often referred to as the Jewel in the Crown of Port Stephens and attracts many tourists. Tomaree Road is dangerous and a disgrace. I want to know when it is going to be fixed.

    • Secretary TRRA Inc Margaret Wilkinson says:

      Beejeepers – You could have quite a wait. Page 227 of the PSC Works Program 2014-2024 shows for the 2016-17 financial year a Road Pavement Assets project Tomaree Road, Shoal Bay: reconstruction from Marine Drive to Garden Place, Stage 1 $590,000. Lack of footpaths can sometimes date back to the older subdivisions such as Shoal Bay and we see this right across the Shire and in areas of similar high usage. In the meantime we continually see valuable ratepayer funds wasted in so many other ways,eg overkill of 7 Councillors heading to Darwin Local Government Conference. All this and more waste, while we have a civil assets maintenance backlog of around $26M.

  11. Beejeepers says:

    Recently PS Council took it upon themselves to install a facility (barbed wire compound) on the recently refurbished Shoal Bay east water front. A lot of local volunteers were instrumental in the success of this development and they were not consulted.

    Personally i feel that it does not matter where the compound is situated, the fact is that council have allowed a sectional interest to compromise what is, and should, remain public land.
    The meaning of public land in the context of this argument is that the public have the right to use all of that land for public recreational purposes.

    The problem council have here is that that area which is enclosed by the fencing is no longer available to the general public, but now for the exclusive use of the Outrigger club.

    Another major issue here is that this sets a precedent. If the present situation can not be changed, the public could be faced with a plethora of such like structures.

    There would be no problem if the enclosure were removed and a rack of some kind erected for the storage of Outrigger club’s craft. This would however, need careful consideration by council and with public consultation, as to the placement of such a rack. This would be necessary due to the bulk of the craft involved.

    I have taken exception to the way in which council have handled this whole fiasco.
    Namely:

    • No public consultation.
    • That council would even consider that the outrigger club, or any other group, can have exclusive use of a public reserve.Take for example the two already existing shelters erected on the reserve, i.e. the Shoal Bay Fishing Club shelter and the Professional Fisherman’s shelter. Both of these shelters do not preclude their use by the public.

    • That when the structure was first placed on the reserve one of our members asked council what the structure was for. The answer was we do not know. Subsequent later inquiry revealed that it was for the Outrigger club.

    • One of council’s excuses for granting exclusive use of a public reserve to the Outrigger club was that the same process was used as the granting to the Shoal Bay Community Association, to construct a pathway. How can a facility for the use by the general public, be compared to a barbed wire detention-camp like structure, for the exclusive use of a small group?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.