Grab The Money And Run…………………!

“I want to make money for the people of Port Stephens.” said Bruce Mackenzie, Mayor in the Council debate about the Planning Principles for Salamander Shopping Centre. (27 Nov 2012)

However the ratepayers of Port Stephens were referred to by some Councilors in the debate to as Bleeding Hearts, Jack Rabbits and Whingers who will oppose everything until the day that they die.

TRRA Inc. has always welcomed appropriate development in Port Stephens as long as it is planned properly with the long term prosperity and well being of the Community at heart.  We have never opposed development per se. TRRA Inc. representatives have played an active role in all the Planning Principle workshops for the Nelson Bay Waterfront, the Nelson Bay CBD and recently, the Salamander Shopping Centre Precinct, and have put a lot more time, effort and resources into them than many of the Councillors ever did, particularly the ones who made these remarks. We never cease to be amazed at the arrogance of these people that have the idea that getting elected to Council gives them the right to make decisions on behalf of everyone, based on what they think.  It might be an idea to occasionally ask and act on what we the ratepayers think.

When Council puts a proposal on exhibition for a couple of weeks and asks for Submissions it seems that some Councillors are suprised that they actually get a few………….!

Councillor Nell correctly referred to the Planning Principles that were adopted instead of a Master Plan or DCP as ‘motherhood statements’ because that is what they are. There is nothing binding in them.  There was nothing in the Principles for Nelson Bay CBD about the building heights that we finaly ended up with in the DCP.  Why $67,000.00 was wasted on this Salamander exercize other than to give the impression that the community was consulted we don’t know. These agreed ‘principles’ have no teeth.

Councillors Nell and Dingle also correctly referred to the massive conflict of pecuniary interest, where Council are the owners, the applicants and the assessors for the development of the land on the site.  The first time Councils  proposal went to a third party for assessment (Joint Regional Planning Panel) it was thrown out, with one of the reasons given that there was no Master Plan.  The Tinkler exercise fell over in the end because he wanted a clause inserted in the contract, that it was all contingent on approval by the JRPP.  Tinkler’s people knew it would never happen without a Master Plan and it was the perfect way out for them when the money dried up.  Now here we go again with Big W.  The proposed 3 Lot subdivision has been especially designed to be under the 5 mill threshold specifically to avoid scrutiny by any third party.  Why?  Because as was clearly stated in the Council debate, they don’t care what we end up with, as long as they get their hands on the cash to fix their bottom line.  While ever that land is owned by the Council they have some control over what happens to it, once it is sold without a DCP or Master Plan they have lost control of it and what we end up with will be at the whim of the developer, then and in the future. Accept what he wants, or get nothing. What a sell out.

Newcastle Herald article  HERE

Watch the debate on your Computer HERE.  Click on 27/11/12 Ordinary Council Meeting and fast forward to the 30 min mark.

The Big W Development.         

Look at our images HERE.  The only way the public could access this information was to go to Raymond Terrace in office hours to look at it in a big binder.  it was only on exhibition for the minimum period of two weeks. TRRA were eventually successful in getting a copy to Salamander Library.  We had to beg borrow or steal these images with phone cameras etc. to get them on our website, now with only three days to go before submissions close. 

 We hope you will write letters to the papers / General Manager, Councillors and Politicians about how you feel about this process.  Do you feel that you have been properly consulted about this?  We would have thought that in this electronic age that this information would be freely available to those who were interested on their computers.  Bleeding Hearts, Jack Rabbits, and Whingers unite!  (Don’t forget a word of encouragement for the Councillors that did try to stop this traversty. Only 3 out of 10.)

Update 05 December, Formal Submission has now been Lodged HERE

We are putting together a formal submission which will go in by the closing date Wed December 5.  Below are the main points we will be making:

DA Salamander Land Sub Division Draft Dot Points for submission 2 December 2012 

• Lack of transparency in advertising, misleading newspaper ad.
• Conflict of interest within council being owners, applicants and assessors
• Lack of public consultation, major controversial development with no public discussion
• Planning Principles approved by Council, didn’t endorse development such as a single lot sell off without further planning, such as a Master plan.
• Financial; unacceptable to sell of an asset to pay for poor financial management in the past, particularly maintenance. Any profit from Salamander land sales should be targeted at providing additional assets at Salamander, such as a Town Hub as identified in the PP. No plans submitted for anything apart from roads.
• Landscaping, who is going to fund and maintain this in the future?
• Road No 3 with the 4.7m high wall will become a wind tunnel with strong winds
• Road No 3 is the only access route into and out of the proposed Big W car park. It doesn’t connect to the other car park of existing shopping centre to SW. Out of hours this road will become a racing track as it is out of sight. It would be poor design to put speed humps in.
• Proposed left in/Left out intersection at Bagnall Beach Road (Road No 1) is along the boundary of Rigby Centre. Too close to the main roundabout at Sandy Point Road but totally unacceptable to be next to the exit lane from KFC.
• Bus Interchange along western side of Road No 2 will have all passengers having to cross the very busy Road No 2 and car park to access existing centre. No connectivity with western side of shopping centre as no through road around Lot2. No mention of a covered walk way to the shops.
• Storm water appears to be covered for runoff from the new roads. Mention that the existing storm water is at capacity and not really up to standard. Assuming that drainage from the three Lots will be through existing permeable surface until future development. Big W DA states Fabcot Pty. Ltd. will be supplied with a site for Big W serviced with ”storm water”. There doesn’t appear to be any mention in this DA of how this will be achieved through a retention basin or the like. Is it going straight into the Mambo wetlands?
• Mention of existing bike path along the back of the residential lots on the northern boundary connecting into the NW corner of the development, not clear how this will work.
• Mention of a 2.4m pedestrian pathway around the entire Lot 1. This will be a waste of money as everybody will cut across the Lot until it is developed.
• 130 000 cubic metres of sand to transported to quarry there and likely back again. Expect 64 truck movements per day for 10-12 weeks. No time limits stated. Also about 10-15 extra truck movements per day with construction work. Carbon miles on transporting this twice for “potential reuse to fill other low lying areas of the proposed subdivision following any subsequent development consent for Lot 3.” Although we don’t want it stock piled on site, it would have been better to have this designed in a Master plan in the first place.
• Overall site contains 3ha of swamp forest but expected loss of only 0.5 ha including 4 koala feed trees, to be ameliorated by re-vegetation of three near  by cleared areas within Mambo wetlands to the west. This is good to re-vegetate however this is not really an offset as cleared land shouldn’t have been cleared in the first place, it is protected land so can’t be used for anything else and will over time be re-vegetated any way either naturally or through community groups replanting.
• No consideration of developing existing shopping centre up or at the sides, it is fast becoming a very long narrow centre.
• Totally inadequate provision for parking, This Shopping Centre should be going up, not out and you should be able to park once and shop, without a cut lunch and a compass…………….

What can you do?

Inspect the documents at the library. Send in a Submission before 5pm Wednesday 5 December 2012.

if you agree with our points, copy and past them into an email or use some of your own.

Email to:  council@portstephens.nsw.gov.au

Subject:  Objection – DA720/2012

Dear General Manager

“I wish to lodge an objection to DA 720/2012, a combined 3 Lot subdivision at 155 Salamander Way and Diemars Quarry at Soldiers Point.

Your points……………………….

Highlight, copy and past this into an email and send it right away!

**NB: Some people have been getting a n aknowledgement from Council and a request for a declaration  about political donations etc.  We dont want any to be knocked back so if they ask, send them something like this:

“I have no financial interest in the planning application nor have I made any reportable political donations or gifts over the last two years.”

Thank you

Now feel special, you are the only ones in Port Stephens that know a little bit of what is going on with your Shopping Centre!