Phone 4325 7369 Fax 4325 7362 Email us
2005 (c) Peninsula Community Access Newspaper Inc
Clearing allowed before construction certificate |
Gosford Council has resolved to allow clearing before a construction certificate is issued for a proposed retirement village on Hillview St, Woy Woy.
It resolved to modify Condition 1 of the development application to state that no works could be commenced without a construction certificate other than investigative earthworks, clearing of vegetation within the proposed building envelope and activities associated with weed removal, native plant and seed harvesting.
Condition one previously stated that "no works shall be commenced until a construction certificate has been issued".
Council has also resolved to approach Bush Care groups to obtain their support for the most appropriate use of the 1500 cubic metres of endangered ecological community topsoil.
Cr Terri Latella dissented from the motion.
Australian Conservation Foundation Central Coast branch president Mr Mark Snell spoke against the motion at the meeting.
Although not objecting to changes to condition one in itself, Mr Snell stated that other conditions should also have been changed and considered at the same time.
"Condition 81 of the development consent requires permission from the Department of Environment and Climate Change (DEC) if, among other things, the order in which clearing takes place is to change," Mr Snell said.
"There is no evidence that the DEC has given permission for this.
"Let's be clear: This is not minor.
"The application is to allow clearing of the whole building envelope - the full extent of clearing to be undertaken for this development.
"It also allows work to occur in the remaining bush area.
"It overrides the previous plans for the staged clearing of the site.
"It allows this to proceed without important environmental safeguards.
"The developer will not be required to pay a security deposit.
"He will not be required to pay any money into an environmental trust before clearing takes place.
"This means that if, for any reason, development stops, there is no money to restore the damage that has been done."
"There are many reasons that development might stop."
Mr Snell said that one reason was that the developer had asked for several other changes to conditions of consent.
"Not all the details are public," he said.
"However, the developer has written to council saying he is not prepared to comply with Condition 80, which requires compensatory works.
"He claims that an agreement was reached. His contribution to the trust fund was in place of these works.
"If this agreement existed, why was it not reflected in the consent conditions?
"The DEC does not appear to agree with the developer.
"And, if the DEC does not agree with the proposed change and the developer is not prepared to do the work required, the development would be brought to a halt.
"We could be left with extensive environmental damage and no mechanism to rectify it.
"Condition 80 and the trust fund payments compensate for the damage sustained by this development.
"The payments to the fund were staged to reflect the clearing of the property.
"If the clearing of the property is to happen at once, payment of the full $225,000 should also be required at once.
"If council is to proceed, at the very least, this application should be treated together with the other requested changes."
Mr Snell said the application should have been referred to the DEC, advertised for public comment and a fresh assessment made of the merits of the new compensatory proposal.
"Because the changes requested by the developer now appear to differ substantially from the SIS recommendations, there are grounds to require a fresh development application.
"This proposal is to allow clearing without requiring any form of security, without agreement on compensatory measures, and relies entirely on the goodwill and generosity of the developer.
"This is naïve, shows no prudence, and is poor planning practice."
"It creates a precedent which could be exploited by other developers and sends the wrong message to the community."
Council agenda ENV.49, 25 Jul 2007