 |
| CLICK ON THE IMAGE TO ENLARGE |
CLICK ON THE IMAGE TO ENLARGE
8 September 2011
George Town Council
Anne St
George Town 7253
Dear Mr Brown
We, the undersigned have had legal advice which confirms our belief that the George Town Council has failed to give proper notification to the George Town community in accordance with the Land Use Planning & Approvals Act 1993 Section 57, and in respect of the two Planning Applications advertised in The Examiner on Saturday, 27 August 2011
ie.
- DA 2011/77 Woolcott Surveys obo Low Head Developments 6 Lot Subdivision at 257 - 261 Low Head Rd, Low Head; and
- DA 2011/78 Department of Education obo The Crown for a Single Storey Civic Building Incorporating LINC, Service Tasmania and Child and Family Centre
3. EQUITY & TRANSPARENCY: Equity, consistency and transparency is paramount in Council decisions and processes to ensure fairness to all sectors of our community.
To expand on our claim of improper notification of Planning Applications:
Firstly, in relation to the Notice of Planning Applications in the Examiner newspaper, the purpose of these notices is to give the public proper information on all aspects of the developments. This notice is defective, in that it has failed to indicate where Representations should be lodged ie George Town Council, and to whom it should be addressed (General Manager or Council?). Although not legally required, it is the usual practice and would have been helpful, to have indicated the actual time and the cut off date for representations to be made.
Secondly, considering the size of both these large developments, the descriptions are defective, in that they fail to describe the extent of the actual developments for the information of the public. A 6 Lot Subdivision is hardly descriptive of the developer's intent.
DA 2011/78 is described only as a "Single Storey Civic Building Incorporating LINC, Service Tasmania and Child and Family Centre" which we believe is misleading as it is yet to be proven that this building IS a "Civic" building (and the TPC certainly indicated this) and whilst it may well be single storey, it is still a high profile building at 6.800m high. Furthermore, as there has been negligible consultation within the wider George Town community in relation to this large development, and because we still have a "Library", the term "LINC" is not generally or widely understood and many people would have no idea what it is - so too, with a Child and Family Centre.
Also in respect of the latter development (DA 2011/78), the description of the site of the proposed development as 29 - 67 Macquarie St (20 blocks!) is extremely vague and misleading. The proposed building is planned for a section of the SW Macquarie/Elizabeth St sector of Regent Square, and it would have been reasonable to expect "Regent Square" to be mentioned in the description so that everyone understood where it was.
While the format of the notice is not covered by the Act, it would appear to be purposely designed to make the Planning Notice for these two large developments as inconspicuous as possible, and this does not reflect the Council's core values of 'Equity, Consistency and Transparency in Council decisions and processes...' . It was completely different to the usual notices, with a tiny, compact font, no spacing or bolded headings, an unfamiliar logo, and no 'George Town Council' at the top. The most recent one (Wed 7 Sept) was an improvement. The attached copy of the last four GTC Notices illustrates my point.
The LUPA Act also requires that notices be placed as near as possible to each public boundary. There is only ONE notice on a pole in Elizabeth St to the west, and no notice anywhere near the eastern or southern side of the site where most people park or come to go to the shops, Library, Online Access Centre or other activities in the hall - nor is there one to the north - none at all in Macquarie St - the address that is given!
The only notices at the two sites, fail to comply with the regulations as they do not inform the public that representations may be made in respect of the Development, where they may be made, or where the plans may be inspected.
Furthermore, the neighbours who live in close proximity to the site in Elizabeth St have not been notified of the DA 2011/78 Development as required by the Act.
Council advised that the Plans would be available for inspection in both the foyer of the Council Chambers and of the Memorial Hall from Monday 29 August for 14 days, but the plans that were on display in the Hall up until at least the end of Thurs of the first week were the OLD plans. I believe the correct ones were put up some time on Friday, but by Tuesday 6 Sept they had been taken down again for a Planning Workshop and on Thurs 8 Sept, the OLD ones had reappeared!
Admittedly, there is not a lot of difference between the 'old' and the 'new' plans, apart from the changing of the 3 large "Training Rooms", 2 "Consulting" Rooms and a "Parent Room" all to become "Meeting Rooms", presumably to better fit the "Civic" use, but there was nothing to indicate these were NOT the latest plans.
Again in view of the above, we request Council re-advertise these two Planning Applications in accordance with the regulations and in a more conspicuous format to that used in the Examiner Notice on Sat 27 August and allow another 14 days for representations, in order to properly inform the public as required by the relevant LUPA Act and reflect George Town Council policies and values.
Sincerely
Loraine Wootton
Des. Wootton
NOTE: a separate Representation has
been lodged with the General Manager.
been lodged with the General Manager.
2 comments:
They certainly didn't want anyone to know about it did they?
How DEVIOUS can you get?
If you haven't seen this happen before you may not have been looking
Post a Comment