Alex Christlo - 28 August 2018
Alex Christlo addressed council regarding logging the Estuary Estate Development at the Ordinary Council Meeting 28 August 2018.
Presentation to Non-Agenda Items.
Effect of Oaks Ranch Development on Estuary Estate.
The Estuary Estates experience with the Council and the Oaks Ranch Developer is a very stark example of the favourable treatment given the Developer at the expense of the residential amenity. The Estuary will no longer have their closed road estate which along with the large lots, minimal traffic and low noise levels makes the development such a wonderful place to live.
On 22nd January, 2018 some Estuary residents received a copy of a DA for a Two Lot Subdivision and Construction of Road. The Oaks Ranch Developer has bought a large lot in the Estuary adjoining the Oaks, split it into two lots and will punch a 123m long public access road through to the Estuary, The Oaks will have cheap access for their future development and the Estuary have lost their main amenity- a closed-road traffic estate.
A total of 36 objections were submitted, a petition signed by 99% of Estuary residents and 7 speakers presented our objections to the access road at a Meeting of Council on 27th March. A motion to delay the road to allow further information and clarifications was defeated by 7 to 2 votes The issue was handed to the Council Officers for final determination.
It was obvious that Council was determined to give consent to the Developer We were being ignored! Development Consent for the access road was given on 31st May 2018.
It would appear Councils procedure when handling a large development, using the Estuary's experience as a guide, is to work very closely with the Developer and make decisions on as many of the issues as possible. Only then do you involve affected residents. This would support the observed mindset of Council Officers that the access road decision was final and nothing would change their decision.
Estuary residents were surprised when informed of the proposed access road given that residential development was refused by NSW Government Planning Department in 2010. It appears the Developer and Council were not deterred and the 90 residential dwellings refused by NSW Government in 2010 was entered into the ELEP 2012.Further, the 90 residential dwellings are allowed on land where this category of permanent residential development is normally prohibited! It appears the permission to include the 90 dwellings with consent was made fallowing a submission by Provent Pty Ltd, the company behind the 2010 Oaks Ranch Development Plan.
The Provent submission requesting the 90 dwellings was summarised on page 206 of a 264 page LEP Submissions Responses document - available on Council's website as an attachment to the Council report of 20th Dec. 2011. The summary states, "Requests changes be made to the zone boundaries proposed on the land, and also the inclusion of permanent residential development component for the land". Very surprisingly, there is no mention of Oaks Ranch, no relevant lot or DP number and no mention of the 90 dwellings! It would appear we are to suspect the request is of little significance. However, it is well to note that 90 dwellings is greater than the total number of dwellings in the Estuary Estate [80 dwellings]. The column headed" Staff Justification" gives no justification but simply states "Changes to zone boundary to be made to maps. Permanent residential development component included in schedule 1".
Our concern is that partiality may have been shown to the Provent request without any regard to the impact on the adjoining Estuary Estate. Also, no community consultation or input or any attempt to address the inconsistency with the Eurobodalla Settlement Strategy and the South Coast Regional Strategy.
Consider the reaction of anyone to the following situation: A neighbouring large land owner has bought a big lot in your closed traffic estate and is going to construct a short access road to link into the estates road system. Then, the neighbour will construct 90 residential dwellings in stages and finally construct a further 186 or more dwellings. The traffic will increase approximately 700% over the next 10 to 15 years. This will allow the neighbour to make a lot more money by avoiding more costly alternatives. The reaction--resident anger and concern!
The Council appears to view this situation to be reasonable and supports the landowning neighbour. The landowner makes money, the Council makes money and the residents lose their amenity!
Yes, as they say "money has no morals"!