Veron Rd questions remain

You will know by now that the Land and Environment court has delivered its judgement in the Veron Road case.

In a rare victory for the residents, Justice Bignold has rejected the appeal for the construction of 40 residential units and ruled that the development will not proceed.

Invoking the "precautionary principle", Bignold J reasoned that if the experts could not agree on the amount of threatened woodland still intact then he must be cautious in his judgement.

The developer's expert reckoned 24 hectares while the court's expert could only stretch it to six hectares.

Which ever number it's bugger all.

Great result. However some issues remain.

While the residents responded overwhelmingly to calls to protect or purchase this obviously valuable land we ask:

Why did council not purchase this land when it was offered to them some three years ago?

Council had funds available in the Developer Contributions fund that it has been collecting since 1992 for the specific purpose of acquiring open space.

The Peninsula is some 20 hectares short of the standard in open space for the population we now have.

Why is the Catholic Church prepared to flog of a piece of environmentally sensitive land, pretty much as God created it, to developers?

Bryan Ellis Secretary Save Our Suburbs Woy Woy