Browse Forums Building A New House Re: Anyone building at George's Fair, Moorebank? 1981Jun 01, 2011 12:50 pm well what an interesting meeting to say the least. i have been doing some searching on the net and have found the previous proposal back in 2005 http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/asp/pdf/ ... ssment.pdf i ave also found another interesting article from the outcome of that proposal, from the land and environment court 2009. it also outlines their ******* attempts to mislead the council in order to gain approval http://www.lgsa.org.au/resources/docume ... _09_41.pdf Re: Anyone building at George's Fair, Moorebank? 1982Jun 01, 2011 1:02 pm hi all Still digesting last nights events and trying to stay calm, a few things i have thought abour since, 1. the truck movements are an estimate, so in reality it could be double that. 2. the look on there faces when they saw the numbers was priceless 3. remark by the lady that everyone within 1.5km radius was letter boxed can't be correct as some don't have a letter box and some like myself don't even have a house! 4.we need to pressure the councul to not release the land 5.council elections are held next year i beleive so its a good to time to lobby the other councillors who weren't at the meeting and put pressure on them to support us And finally the response she gave when answered weather she would have the development next door to her really made my blood boil. She choose to live in Wollongong knowing that there's a coal industry there, we chose georgesfair to have a nice clean safe enviroment to bring up our kids not to have a noisy dust creating recycling plant next door which we didn't know about. Re: Anyone building at George's Fair, Moorebank? 1983Jun 01, 2011 1:06 pm RichandKat And finally the response she gave when answered weather she would have the development next door to her really made my blood boil. She choose to live in Wollongong knowing that there's a coal industry there, we chose georgesfair to have a nice clean safe enviroment to bring up our kids not to have a noisy dust creating recycling plant next door which we didn't know about. Wow, i must be either really memorable, or asked the questions that everybody else wanted to. That's two from two for me Re: Anyone building at George's Fair, Moorebank? 1984Jun 01, 2011 2:20 pm kballa7983 For all 3a peeps, settlement is here, just notified that we settle on the 22 June Woohooo Geez my conveyancer will be getting a call I went outside once. The graphics were alright, but the gameplay sucked! Settlement:22nd June Slab:27th August Frame:16th Sept Bricked:21st Oct Roof:24th Nov Linings HANDOVER23rd March! Re: Anyone building at George's Fair, Moorebank? 1986Jun 01, 2011 3:30 pm I just can't get over the fact that they couldnt tell us about what kind of toxin were going to be going in to the plant! Bek - i was thinking the same thing about buying them out lol! wish i had a spare few million! joannapaulp - My husband and i rsvp 6! 2 were unable to come due to family health issues. so i am not sure how they came up with 70 people! Also they did state on the letter that you don't need to RSVP! honestly what did she expect????? I am so upset about this whole issue! Lets just pray that this NEVER gets approve. Re: Anyone building at George's Fair, Moorebank? 1987Jun 01, 2011 5:44 pm The meeting last night had a great turnout. I think they were a bit surprised so many people took the time to go. Glad for the gentleman who spoke out and suggested we all stay in our seats instead of moving around, and that our comments should be heard by everyone. At the beginning, that was not their intention as I spoke to two of the gentlemen on our table and when I suggested that at the beginning, they were not in favor of it. I told them how could everyone hear what our comments were going to be and it was not fair that way. Common sense prevailed. Has anyone who emailed out to Planning Minister, Premier, our State and Federal Members and Councillors, etc received any replies? Have only received two replies, one from Planning Ministers office and only one reply from our local councillors. The others would not or did not bother to reply. Did the councillors who were at the meeting say they were from North Ward? There was a lot of noise going on and it was difficult to hear all. However, wonder why there were no councillors there except Jim from South Ward. (Isn't that our Ward?) Their comment that there were no Labor Councillors there was very interesting. It seemed apparent that even the councillors were not aware that the Council had already approved Moorebank Recyling to have access to Brickmakers Road. So goodness knows what goes on behind closed doors!! I know there was a staffer there at the meeting from Craig Kelly's office. We should be made aware of when it will go to Council and as many people attend that meeting. We will then see who votes for this proposal and who does not. Those councillors who vote for it, may have the favor returned when the next Council elections are held, and we can hopefully vote them out. Good idea to get an action group going, and this forum has shed light on so many issues. It keeps us in touch. I do agree there were some people there last night who went overboard. Suggest everyone who has not signed the petition should do so. He lives in GF, is a Lawyer so if you did not receive a letter from him, you can email or phone him. He is wanting to present it shortly to the Minister. Re: Anyone building at George's Fair, Moorebank? 1989Jun 01, 2011 6:23 pm Dear Friends Myself, Gary Lucas, Peter Harle and Tony Hachiti are asking questions at Council now and awaiting answers. As stated before there were three independent and one Liberal Councillor there last night. I will be fighting with you to stop this madness so will the others or they would not have been there on the night. Check out this website for the truth on Diesel pollution. Cancer, Asthma etc etc etc. and crushed concrete and road pavement have almost the same problems with the dust. If you live within 10k of this you will get a gut full as well, Lucky we have such modern Hospital facilities in Liverpool. http://www.nointermodal.com You all have to yell out loud to be heard, their is no polite way to win this, Contact the ministers of planning, transport,health and your local member. I can recommend as an Independent if you contact the Federal Member for this area you will get a reply and a hearing he is a good man. Write to local and daily papers, call radio stations and TV. Warning: Do not sit back and think someone will fix this for you. YOU are that someone, do it. Regards Jim M. 0410740399 E 625110@tpg.com.au Re: Anyone building at George's Fair, Moorebank? 1990Jun 01, 2011 7:05 pm mecha-wombat kballa7983 For all 3a peeps, settlement is here, just notified that we settle on the 22 June Woohooo Geez my conveyancer will be getting a call Hi Stage 3A folks .... ours too! Our solicitor cum conveyancer informed us that our settlement date is also 22nd June! Hallelujah! But on Moorebank Recycling, Hallelujah NO NO Re: Anyone building at George's Fair, Moorebank? 1991Jun 01, 2011 7:19 pm On the 3A settlement note. Congrats guys. Thats some good news which has been few and far between lately. Re the proposal matter. I need a break from the whole situation for a few days then I'll get stuck into more letter writing. For all your joinery needs, we custom build kitchens, office, wardrobes, garage, laundry fit outs plus TV units, pantry, linen and everything in between. PM me for more info or details. Re: Anyone building at George's Fair, Moorebank? 1992Jun 01, 2011 7:30 pm infocus Re the proposal matter. I need a break from the whole situation for a few days then I'll get stuck into more letter writing. Yes, I agree. Let's leave this for a while. However, we need to form a working group to work out our strategy. Any seconder? Re: Anyone building at George's Fair, Moorebank? 1993Jun 01, 2011 7:36 pm Yes, it was a good turn-out. Whether that gets reflected in the report back to Moorebank Recyclers is debateable. I'm pretty sure the whole exercise is just to satisfy the requirement to consult the community, these guys spent more time talking about how they wanted the meeting to run than giving some real insight into what this thing is going to look like, real data on comparable concrete crushing operations would have been a start. Is anyone the wiser as to what we can expect in terms of noise levels, just what decibels are typically experienced in the vicinity of these operations, what residents around those sites say about them. It was just dry references to meeting state government regulations. I must say I was surprised that J****e spoke so strongly against the proposal, it sort of gives us a bit of heart that Investa and Urbex will oppose it through more direct channels. The support of the people from Benedict was fantastic. Having a couple of corporates in our corner really improves our chances of killing this madness in it's tracks. Bek, you really hit the mark with your comments, spot on- how is an ugly, polluting, noisy industrial factory compatible with a new and still gowing residential area within close proximity to a river and the prospect of a marina to beautify the area and open it up to the community. Paul you are very correct, the issue of property valuations pre and post this factory is very relevant and should form part of the assessment. It's as relevant as all of the other issues. It's marvellous that even though we aren't all yet neighbours we're banding together like an establised community. I'm very encouraged.. Re: Anyone building at George's Fair, Moorebank? 1994Jun 01, 2011 7:48 pm Heldon i ave also found another interesting article from the outcome of that proposal, from the land and environment court 2009. it also outlines their ******* attempts to mislead the council in order to gain approval http://www.lgsa.org.au/resources/docume ... _09_41.pdf Yes, this very interesting. I don't think the author will mind me posting into this forum. 1. Moorebank Recyclers Pty Ltd v Liverpool City Council & (2) Ors [2009] NSWLEC 100 1.1 Background: This case concerned the construction of a road bridge over land owned by Moorebank Recyclers Pty Ltd (Moorebank). Moorebank owned a vacant block of land bounded by the Georges River to the east, land owned by Tanlane Pty Ltd (Tanlane) to the north and land owned by Boral Bricks Pty Ltd (Boral) to the east. Tanlane and Moorebank had access to their land from Newbridge Road to the north. However, the RTA had indicated to the Council and all parties that access from Newbridge Road would not be permitted if either the Tanlane or Moorebank sites were developed. Rather, access would be provided through a new road which would pass directly through the land owned by Boral, which was to be dedicated to the Council under a Deed between Boral and the Council. Tanlane submitted a development application to Council for the construction of a road bridge which passed over Moorebank’s land. However, it was a ‘bridge to nowhere’ because, although it started on Tanlane’s land, it did not quite connect to Boral’s land. This was, in part, because of its land to Council for the purposes of a road which would ultimately be connected to the bridge. Further, although Tanlane had submitted a development application for the construction of a road bridge, it did not submit a development application for the use of the road bridge. Accordingly, a further development application was required for the use of the road bridge. The Council granted consent to Tanlane’s development application, subject to conditions. Moorebank then commenced proceedings in the Court requesting a judicial review of the Court’s decision. Moorebank was concerned because if it decided to develop its land, it had been informed by the RTA that it would not be able to use its current access and, therefore, would be required to access the road bridge. Moorebank intended to establish a concrete recycling plant on its site and was concerned that the road bridge proposed by Tanlane would not be able to support the vehicles associated with that use. Tanlane & Boral considered Moorebank’s proposed use as inimical to their intended use, which was to redevelop their land for residential and commercial purposes. Although there were other minor issues in the case, the main ground for appeal was that the Council had failed to consider the possibility that by granting consent, Moorebank might never be able to obtain access to its land if it were to seek to develop it for the purpose of concrete recycling, which was permitted within the zone. The Council’s Manager of Statutory Planning and Compliance, recommended that the development application go before the Council’s Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP). In a report to the IHAP, the Manager said that he was unable to support the application for various reasons. The IHAP then recommended that the application be refused. A final report was prepared by the Manager, and put before Council. This report annexed the IHAP recommendation. However, in this report the Manager recommended that the Council grant consent, subject to conditions. Justice Lloyd said that he found the two reports to be materially misleading on the question of whether access could or would be available to Morebank’s land because they contained half truths. Justice Lloyd was concerned with what had been left out of the reports. Accordingly, Justice Lloyd had to consider whether or not this misleading behaviour vitiated Council’s decision. 1.2 Reasoning: Justice Lloyd relied on a history of case law to determine the following principles: Materially misleading statements have the capacity to vitiate a decision in some statutory contexts. The question for the Court is whether the statutory context in which the misleading statement was made invalidates the Council’s decision to grant its consent. • Generally, misleading conduct which is not characterised by **, bad faith or the like is insufficient to vitiate an administrative decision. • The correctness or incorrectness of a conclusion reached by a decision-maker is entirely beside the question. A wrong assessment of relevant considerations does not mean that there has been a failure to take relevant considerations into account. Decision: In applying these principals, Justice Lloyd said that it cannot be said that Council failed to take into consideration to relationship of the proposed development to Moorebank’s land. It did so, even if it misunderstood the effect upon future access to Moorebank’s land. The Manager’s misleading reports did not vitiate the Council’s decision. He said: The Council took into consideration the matters called for under section 79C of the Act... if it came to incorrect conclusions in the course of doing so, that does not invalidate the decision. That is why I spoke the second time in yesterday's meeting why we should NOT take the risk in believing them. They are just nothing but a bag full of ****** by a group of liers! They did exactly that in giving us misleading information! Re: Anyone building at George's Fair, Moorebank? 1998Jun 01, 2011 8:19 pm Nice website. Much better than before. In saying that, they will need more than a new website to sell lots if the proposal goes ahead. For all your joinery needs, we custom build kitchens, office, wardrobes, garage, laundry fit outs plus TV units, pantry, linen and everything in between. PM me for more info or details. Re: Anyone building at George's Fair, Moorebank? 2000Jun 01, 2011 8:28 pm Hey MnM. I don't suppose you were sitting on the traffic table in the far back corner? Same table as the Benedict representitives? For all your joinery needs, we custom build kitchens, office, wardrobes, garage, laundry fit outs plus TV units, pantry, linen and everything in between. PM me for more info or details. Hi, we live in an area where the black soil is prone to a lot of movement. We have an old 50's house with masonite everywhere and nails popping out, warping, rusted etc.… 0 4606 Wish you all the best. Once you signed the contract, they will find millions excuses to charge you. And have seen their sites unfinished for a long time. 4 25394 As title suggests, looking at using the interlocking Pentablock stacked stone products to replace failing timber retaining… 0 18374 |