‘Misleading’ report will trash

region’s biodiversity and character

Central Coast Council has ignored expert advice from NSW Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEEW) and recommended that the undemocratically elected administrator Rik Hart pushes through a planning proposal that will undermine the region’s biodiversity and alter its future character and livability.

29 May 2024

 

EXPERT advice from NSW Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEEW) has been ignored by Council staff, who have recommended that Administrator Hart push through a planning proposal to rezone more than 3000 properties, which covers hundreds of hectares, some containing environmentally fragile land, across the coast. The Administrator-led Council is proceeding with this rezoning at an unhealthy pace, three months out from the restoration of democratically elected councillors, despite the NSW Government’s own opinion that this will reduce biodiversity.

 

Community Environment Network (CEN) Chair, Mr Gary Chestnut, said “Mr Hart was asked to adopt staff recommendations at last night's Council meeting, which would irreversibly alter the character of over half the region, undermine the Coastal Open Space System (COSS) and ‘has the potential to affect’ biodiversity.”

 

According to CEN, the planning proposal to ‘move’ deferred matters lands in the former Gosford Local Government Area into the Central Coast Consolidated Local Environmental Plan 2022 (CCLEP2022) will result in:

 

• High value conservation land having less protection via inappropriate zoning;

 

• The potential for over 3000 residential structures (dwellings, dual occupancies and secondary dwellings) to be built on 1037 allotments currently zoned 7(a);

 

• Threats to Coastal Open Space System reserves and National Parks because adjoining land will not be zoned C2; and

 

• Curtailment of the ability to expand COSS via voluntary acquisition of neighbouring land.

 

Mr Chestnut said it was “vindicating” to read the council report and find that criticisms of the planning proposal by the Biodiversity, Conservation and Science Group (BCS) within DCCEEW were like those CEN had been making for three years.

 

“It is, however, devastating to see Central Coast Council staff dismiss the expertise of the BCS Group. Mr Hart’s legacy will be to undermine the precious biodiversity of the Central Coast if he goes ahead with the staff recommendation.”

 

Comments made by BCS included:

 

• Any reduction in conservation outcomes, including additional permissibilities, will be difficult to reverse in the future…as it reduces the environmental protection of the land.”

 

• Deferred lands should be assessed for High Environmental Value (HEV) as described in the Regional Plan 2041 in order to be compliant with current planning policy.

 

• Alternatively (to zoning all 7(a) land C2) an ecological site assessment should be provided. BCS normally request a Stage 1 BAM assessment be provided where biodiversity has the potential to be affected.

 

• New zones do not follow the vegetation boundaries. In this case BCS request that all the vegetation is zoned C2 (using straight lines) and it to be up to the landowner to justify why this should not be the case.

 

• Contrary to p.56 of the Planning Proposal all land adjacent to National Parks should be considered ‘sensitive land’.

 

• The C4 zone has been applied to lots that are constrained by flooding. it is considered that C2 or C3 zoning is more appropriate for the flood planning area.”

 

“It is clear that the DCCEEW agrees with CEN: the recommendation being presented by staff has the potential to undermine existing Coastal Open Space reserves and National Parks and the region’s biodiversity because it reduces the environmental protection of the land,” Mr Chestnut said.

 

“This advice is from the group within the NSW Government that has the legal responsibility to protect the natural environment and Aboriginal cultural heritage across NSW. How can Mr Hart ignore it?

 

“Many other misleading statements are included in the report to Mr Hart: of the 328 submissions only 79 supported the planning proposal but the report calls that a ‘significant’ number. The report claims council must follow a NSW Government Practice Note adopted in April 2009 and claims it is more current that the former Gosford LEP, adopted in 2014.

 

“CEN requested an urgent meeting with Central Coast Council CEO, Mr David Farmer and Mr Hart before the Tuesday 28 May meeting. We are writing to the Premier and the Ministers for Planning, Local Government and for the Central Coast urging them to intervene,” Mr Chestnut said.

 

Green Point resident Joy Cooper said that the advice of Council staff to the Administrator was not inline with the advice of the Biodiversity and Science Group (BSG), within the NSW Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEEW).

 

"A letter from the DCCEEW to Council in April this year stated that the Planning Proposal .... reduces the environmental protection of the land," Joy Cooper said.

 

"All 7(a) deferred matters land MUST BE ZONED C2 and all 7(c)2 land MUST BE ZONED C3. It is that simple!"

 

At a time when the Central Coast’s biodiversity is under extreme pressure from climate change, overdevelopment and land clearing, it is essential that the Central Coast keeps as much C2 Conservation land as possible. "We are already facing the extinction of flora and fauna by 2070. This planning proposal should at the very least be deferred for further consideration," said Mr Chestnut.

 

“Fortunately, Central Coast Council is not the final consent authority for this planning proposal to progress to the stage where changes will be made to the Central Coast LEP 2022 and we have met with the Department of Planning to express our deep concerns.”

 

There was no response from Farmer or Hart to meet with CEN.

 

Mr Chestnut said that there were five key observations in the Council staff presentation to the Administrator that were false and misleading.

 

"I brought this to the attention of Council's Acting Director for the the Environment and Planning, Luke Sulkawski, requesting that he personally present to the Administrator," Mr Chestnut said.

 

Sulkawski, instead, passed the information onto council staff who presented to the Administrator at last night's Council meeting, without advising him of the five key observations and giving him the opportunity to consider them.

 

Hart, as expected, ignored community concerns and adopted Council staff's recommendation, despite commenting that Council had received around 139 community submissions against rezoning the environmentally sensitive land.