Surf Coast Times
Tuesday 5 July 2011
VOL 9. No 27
www.surfcoasttimes.com.au
FREE WEEKLY
IT’S OUR RIGHT SPRING CREEK SPECIAL
We can still be a part of Spring Creek development, says Dean Webster
BY NATHAN HALE SURF Coast Shire is set to fight for the community despite having the decision on the development of Spring Creek taken away from it by the Minister for Planning. Matthew Guy’s ministerial amendment to rezone land in the first kilometre west of Duffields Road, Torquay, means development will take place. However, Surf Coast Shire Mayor, Dean Webster, said the minister and developers will not be allowed to run roughshod over the development of Spring Creek. The shire has been given until August 4 to provide
its views to the minister on his amendment – which they will discuss at the July 27 council meeting. “The facts are that development will take place no matter what we say,” Webster said. “Now we can either stay involved and translate our views and values and those of the community to the planning minister; or we can sit back and let the minister and developers control what happens in that land. “The minister has indicated he would like us to stay involved and as an organisation I believe we need to stay involved so at least when the land is developed, council has a plan which can be enforced so the developers don’t have a free for all.
“The minister has certainly given us a push – and there is no doubt he has had pressure from developers, the State Government and the Federal Government.” Webster said that while councillors will decide what action to take at the July 27 meeting, the amount of groundwork and community consultation undertaken over the past two years cannot be let go to waste. “Councils don’t like being told what to do and some councillors are fairly upset the minister is giving us a push… but in the end we have to make a decision to stay involved or not,” he said. “We have indicated on our plan – through translations from our community engagement process
– that the (community’s) values and principles need to be recognised; such as the need to protect the creeks and catchments and the native vegetation… the pockets of native gum trees. “Under our current plan that we have worked on, only 65 per cent of land in that one-kilometre is available for development. “So while the minster has indicated he will develop the land no matter what our decision is – he has given us the opportunity to work with him and asked for our plan to help provide the values through the 2040 process to help him. “If we don’t, all that negotiation with the community will be thrown out the window.”
Speaking up for Spring Creek, (from left) Maurice Cole, Rod Foord, Jill Hyslop and David Bell are unhappy with the Minister for Planning’s intervention on the future of development in the valley.
» THE DEVELOPERS’ VIEW TWO of the main landholders and prospective developers of Spring Creek are Amex Corporation and Parklea Pty Ltd. Both companies wrote letters to Minister for Planning, Matthew Guy, over the last eight weeks asking for his ministerial intervention on the matter. Despite the letters, Amex’s Rob Burgess said the company was not looking for special treatment – just certainty. “We had met with the planning minister, mayor, councillors, former state member and current state member… we were never seeking any favour or preferential treatment,” he said. “And clearly any decision that delivers certainty, we will welcome. “Until we know what we are dealing with we have no plans, but council’s planning indicates the (size) will be normal residential blocks.” Parklea’s Don Welsh has a strong connection
Surf Forecast
with the area – having worked for a number of years on infrastructure in Jan Juc. His company is developing Jan Juc North – and he assured the community any development will be done sympathetically and in keeping with the coastal guidelines. “From our point of view, the rezoning gives the framework for people to work in, in terms of development… and everybody needs that – both council and developers,” he said. “We are not going to go in to slash and burn our area; the best example I can give is that we have the best coastal architect in Australia working to make sure Jan Juc North delivers the best housing available. “Due to our tight development guidelines, you won’t just be able to whack up a project home – and I find it offensive when people jump to the conclusion that this will be a poor outcome.”
Photo: PETER MARSHALL
» THE COMMUNITY VIEW ONE OF the most outspoken advocates on the development on Spring Creek, David Bell, has labelled the planning minister’s decision money hungry and short-sighted. Bell said Matthew Guy’s decision could easily have been delayed until council delivered its 2040 strategy in August. “I think he is foolish in doing what he has done,” Bell said. “He should have waited. It’s been 27 months since the start of the process, so what’s another month? “He is doing something that you can’t undo… he should have at least been willing to wait until council’s meeting in August. “The land was going to be rezoned in April 2009 at the council meeting – that’s when they stopped and set in place the 2040 process. “Why can’t the minister wait a month until that process finding goes to the council meeting?”
Bell said the decision of the minister proved he was putting money ahead of the community. “The whole process is a sham,” he said. “You’ve had three development groups write to Matthew Guy – yet more than 2,200 people put submissions into council saying they don’t want the development… “Is money that important?” Bell also pointed to the development of Armstrong Creek and asked if affordable housing could really be built in the steeply sloping Spring Creek valley. “I don’t think the implications of Armstrong Creek have been taken into account fully,” he said. “That is going to put extreme pressure on the infrastructure of Torquay and Jan Juc. “And as for affordable housing… I can’t see how you can call it that when you have to build on a steep-sided valley.”
WED 3-5ft+ Building WNW 12º THU 2-4ft+ Easing SW 13º FRI 2-3ft+ Poor SW 13º SAT 3-5+ Quality W 14º
PAGE
94