Rezoning for employment - where are the details?

Who do councillors represent when they don't support the community?

Are they more interested in major players than the local community?

What was Cr Craig Doyle's response to the pro rezoning irrational staff report to all councillors on August 2, 2011?

It seemed to me that the report was stacked with irrelevant information to enhance rezoning.

Was this another example of "some fairly passionate points of view put forward"?

The report presented to councillors by staff reported that there would be 130 full time and part time jobs created.

McDonalds media relations manager reported to the Central Coast Express Advocate that there was a discrepancy and that the job figure was between 80-100 casual and full time jobs.

Has any staff member or councillor contacted McDonalds to obtain an updated estimate on employment creation?

The site is being rezoned primarily to generate employment, yet neither staff nor councillors know any of the significant details.

It is therefore no surprise that the community opposes the rezoning when Council cannot supply accurate information.

Public transport was highlighted as a plus for the changed use by staff who said "the centre was a focal point for bus services in the local area and the land was located on a major bus route".

This statement was contradicted under a later section with "traffic impact that would need to be assessed when a development application is considered by the Council".

How much of the original report was relevant?

Some examples to question are the biodiversity, bushfire management and coastal protection.

The site has been residential since the 1940s so biodiversity and threatened species considerations are superfluous.

What are the chances of the site being evacuated due to bushfire risk?

If the bushfires were close to Umina should we be asking Council to review management of the adjacent petrol stations?

Under Coastal Protection are the following sections: Aim to protect and preserve beach environment and beach amenity (f), to protect and preserve native coastal vegetation (g), to protect and preserve rock platforms (i).

You will be pleased to know that the rock platforms are okay.

The question is, seeing that the management of this issue has been paltry to date, what can the community expect in the future when the development application is debated?

Letter, 31 Dec 2011 Norman Harris, Umina