Was carpark sale cancellation easier than schemozzle?

Why would anyone want to keep the ugly and underutilized Bullion Street carpark ("Council staff decide against Peninsula land sale, PN 524)?

Here was a perfect opportunity to realize some value from a well-located site that, at the moment, is just an ongoing expense for the community.

What is doubly puzzling is that the staff report, apparently, suggests that the sale should go ahead, while, somehow, concluding that it shouldn't.

Of course, the redevelopment of the site would have required clever formulation of the sale conditions and close scrutiny of the work, to ensure compliance.

Perhaps, Council has nobody with the qualifications for such a task, so it was easier just to cancel the idea of a sale than see the whole thing turn out to be a shemozzle, because of incompetent management.

Incidentally, the Council has elaborate conditions for the development of parking lots and enforces them on private owners.

Why doesn't the Bullion St lot meet Council requirements, if it is going to be retained?

SOURCE:

Email, 3 Aug 2021

Bruce Hyland, Woy Woy