Fast Ferry approved
The public debate and the vote of councillors
The item discussed by Council in December 1999 of most interest to the Peninsula community was the decision to approve a fast ferry service between Ettalong and Circular Quay.
The approval included construction of a wharf, car parking and covered area on the reserve on Ettalong Foreshore.
The proposal had previously been given "deferred approval" on 16 February 1999.
Moved: Sansom and Doyle that Council is satisfied with the information supplied to address the conditions of deferred commencement.
Cr Doyle asked that an addendum be added to prohibit commencement of the ferry service until all infrastructure and roadworks are completed.
Cr Bell requested that refuelling be prohibited at Ettalong, or within Brisbane Water or Broken Bay.
He also asked for the inclusion of a specific water quality monitoring program.
Cr Bockholt asked for confirmation that the motion would exclude any ferry passenger parking at the Lemon Grove Netball Courts.
Resident Comments: Mr Rob Molin alleged that council did not follow its own guidelines regarding the environment, in making comments as a resident of the area.
He asserted that part of the foreshore was being given to a private firm and expressed concern about the potential effects of such a large vessel navigating shallow waters.
Mr Bryan Ellis commented that the most recent Environmental Impact Study (EIS) was essentially the same as the original EIS.
He also asked why the final EIS was not publicly exhibited.
The potential damage that might be caused by a 700 metre sea bed "scouring mattress" was a cause for concern he said.
Mr Peter Hale stated that Fast Ships had met all Council and other requirements and that the company had made its best endeavours to limit the effects of the fast ferry on residents.
The ferry would provide an alternative mode of transport and will bring business, he said.
Arguments for:
Cr Bockholt commented that "if Cr Bell is satisfied with the environmental conditions then we all ought to be".
The netball courts problem had been addressed as had the refuelling issue.
This was an opportunity for the Peninsula to move forward, she said.
Cr Cook said that he had concerns relating to the coastal processes but the additional conditions of approval would address the environmental issues.
There would be huge economic benefits, he said.
Arguments against:
Cr Preece stated that there was a conflict with other evidence between the statements made relating to the relative benefits and disadvantages attributed to diesel and gas powered engines.
More information was needed.
The Vote:
On Leave: Cr Penton,
For: Crs Bell, Bockholt, Brooks, Cook, Doyle, Holstein, Sansom
Against: Cr Preece.
Cr Wales declared an interest and left the Chamber during the debate and did not vote.
Draft LEP
Draft Local Environmental Plan (LEP) to Amend Provision of the Gosford Planning Scheme Ordnance With Regard to Medium Density Residential Development.
This was essentially a new set of guidelines about such things as minimum land areas, building height.
Of considerable interest were the statements in the Agenda Papers: " ...the Woy Woy Peninsula will provide 70% of medium density development in Gosford ..." and "Woy Woy Peninsula has been free from dynamic changes over the last 30 years whilst other areas of Gosford have been experiencing considerable change associated with new housing development."
Umina Plan
Moved: Wales. Seconded Bell (only to allow the motion to be discussed) that the plans for the upgrade of Umina Beach by the Umina Beach CBD Committee be brought before Council as soon as possible before any of the planned works commence.
Cr Bell later withdrew his seconding of the motion which subsequently lapsed.
Argument for:
Cr Wales stated that she had been on the CBD Committee for two years.
It was "a dreadful committee" and being on it was a "dreadful experience", she said.
Her "ideas were ridiculed".
The planned upgrade had no feasibility study.
She would like an independent consultant to take over the study.
Treatments to improve traffic flow were needed as was a landscape plan.
Arguments against: Cr Penton contradicted Cr Wales' assertion that there was no comprehensive plan.
The plan was started in 1995 and involved an experienced and highly qualified consultant who carried out a study which was placed on public exhibition, she said.
The plan would make the main street of Umina into a one level street with three raised crossings.
She also pointed out that the CBD grant of $1.5 million had guidelines specifying what the grant could be spent on, namely: paving, gardening, street furniture, parking.
She said some members of the CBD Committee had not attended for two years but turned up to vote and that they had been replaced on the Committee.
Cr Sansom emphasised the need to ensure consensus and to bring together business people and the wider community.
Cr Holstein stated his belief that a decision by Council would not fix the angst in the community.
He said there was a need to find out what the business community wanted.
Cr Bell suggested that there be a meeting called by Council to identify the problems and investigate the plans and options and to talk these through.
Community Comments:
Mr Matthew Wales, president of the Peninsula Chamber of Commerce, stated that he represented the businesses of Umina Beach.
He said the committee had gone nowhere for the past two years and that the committee was split down the middle.
If the plan was so good why was there not consensus, he asked.
The plan would cause traffic congestion, pedestrian flow problems and an independent arbitrator was needed to sort this out, he said.
He said a holistic plan was needed and the vote at the CBD meeting was six for, five against while two votes were disallowed who were entitled to vote.
Mr Ken Hoste, Chairman of the CBD Committee, emphasised the restrictions placed on how the CBD grant could be spent and stated that the plan for the CBD was in accordance with those restrictions.
New Motion:
A motion was moved (Bell/Holstein) and passed, which called for a meeting in February with representatives from all businesses in the CBD, senior citizens, Progress Association, Surf Club, Chamber of Commerce, Gosford City Youth Council and the Umina Beach Action Committee.
If there was no resolution of the dispute the matter was to be brought back to Council.
There were to be no proxy votes.
Environment:
The Mayor has recently been quoted as saying "We will be under pressure to rezone lands from l(a) conservation and 7(c2) scenic protection to 2(a) residential.
I think at this stage the zones are pretty well spot on.
John Oakley, January 15