Developer may get $75,000 back

A developer may be refunded a $75,000 contribution, because Gosford Council has been unable to obtain additional funding to build a pedestrian bridge.

The proposed shared cycleway-pedestrian bridge would link Lace Ave and Myola Rd in the North Pearl estate at Umina Beach.

In a council report, council officers recommended no further action be taken to construct the shared cycleway-pedestrian bridge in Umina Beach.

In January 2006, the Land and Environment Court ordered Bruce Kerr Pty Ltd, developer of the North Pearl estate, to make a $75,000 contribution to council for the construction of the cycleway-pedestrian bridge.

A condition of the court order was that council would be required to refund the contribution should the bridge not be built within three years of the payment being made.

According to the condition, the bridge must be constructed by January 29, next year or the developer contribution is to be refunded.

The proposed shared cycleway-pedestrian bridge dated back to the original approval of the seven-stage North Pearl subdivision which included a condition of consent requiring the construction of a full width roadway across Ettymalong Creek joining the roads.

Construction of the roadway was deferred until the final stage of the subdivision, with the consent of council.

The developer then approached council to waive the condition of development consent relating to construction of the roadway at this location.

The matter was reported to council by its director of environment and planning at the time, who decided that the bridge could be replaced with the requirement for a shared cycleway-pedestrian bridge.

Cr Terri Latella told the October 14 council meeting it was "imperative" that the proposed bridge be built for the community.

"This is an important access point to other forms of transport for pedestrians and cyclists in light of climate change," Cr Latella told the meeting.

"To create an access bridge through there would achieve this.

"It is just ridiculous that more than two years later this issue is unresolved.

"How often does council receive a $75,000 contribution only to see it go to waste?

Let's get on with the job and try and have this project finished for the Peninsula community before the three month deadline is up."

Cr Latella and Cr Peter Freewater moved a motion to proceed with the construction of the bridge within the next three months and continue to pursue funding opportunities.

The motion was lost.

Council instead resolved to liaise with Bruce Kerr Pty Ltd with a public request for additional funds and additional time to complete the shared cycleway-pedestrian bridge and requested that council staff report to council on the outcome of the request.

In late 2006, detailed project development associated with the proposed bridge construction confirmed that the construction of the bridge would cost "considerably more" than $75,000.

According to a council report, the current total estimated cost to design and construct the bridge proposal to meet all requirements for passage of extreme flood flows within Ettymalong Creek and design grades for cycleways would be in the order of $180,000 to $200,000.

The report stated: "Investigations have revealed that the funding program under which the Central Coast Area Consultative Committee (CCACC) had believed the project would be eligible for funding, the Regional Partnerships Program (RPP), has been terminated".

"A search of council's records indicates that to date Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and Arts has not been consulted about this project, it is considered unlikely that approval could be obtained from the department, followed by preparation of an economical detailed design and then actually complete construction before 29 January, 2009," the report stated.

"The proposed pedestrian-cycle link between Lace Ave and Myola Rd will not connect with council's endorsed Cycleway Network."

Representations were also received by council staff in 2006, from local residents who opposed the construction of the bridge.

One concern expressed related to a lack of demand for the bridge, the destruction of vegetation, the adequacy of existing access in the area, the attraction of a "hoodlum element" and the loss of privacy.

A petition of 14 residents opposed to the proposed bridge had also been received by council.

Their concerns were that the bridge would be of no value, it would "attract local youth on motorbikes" and it would disturb nearby residents by becoming a meeting place for youth.

Council agenda CIT.32, 14 Oct 2008