Council united in opposing development application
March 27, 2008
Section: News
KATINA CURTIS
KIAMA councillors resoundingly rejected the Toolijooa lifestyle village proposal with a unanimous vote last week.
The motion to reject the proposal for the 39 reasons outlined in the environmental services director’s report was moved by Cr Nerissa Bradley and seconded by Cr Warren Steel.
Cr Bradley said she thought the report was “very clear and very damning” in its reasons to oppose the proposed development.
“This is one of these types of development applications where this council feels very strongly that we do not want it in the municipality,” she said.
“I think that it’s very important that this council make a very strong statement that a town of 3000 people was not planned in this location and is not wanted.”
Cr Steel said it was “absolute arrogance” on the part of developer Wygiren to refuse to meet with the council and community opponents.
Cr Hamish East said that although he had not been on the council for as long as other councillors, he believed the proposal was “among the most inappropriate and offensive” ever to go before Kiama Council.
Cr Howard Jones again highlighted the fact that, if the development were to go ahead, although it would bring up to 3000 people to the municipality the council would only be able to collect rates based on the single rural property.
He called the proposal “appalling” and said: “This is something that’s going to affect the whole of the community, not just the poor souls who live next to it.”
Cr Trevor Fredericks also expressed concern that the DA fee for the application was quite small.
“When you look at the time and effort our staff have put in, I think it’s quite ludicrous,” he said.
Mayor Sandra McCarthy said she was impressed that council staff had taken the time to go through each public submission separately, especially since there were so many of them.
She reminded people that although with such developments there were often strong emotional reasons for opposing them, it was the legal and planning reasons that counted.