Sharks Circling Suburbia

by Cat Holloway /

Just when you thought it was safe to wander through the park to your local cafe by the beach...in swoops the new Shoalhaven Council to reverse yet another community-led initiative and make life easier for property developers.

Serious questions now surround the details and instigators of a rescission motion to overturn last week's unanimous Council vote for a planning amendment to "elevate and respect" unique local character in the region.

Clr Jemma Tribe was disappointed that the unanimously carried motion was coming back to the chamber.

"The community deserves an explanation," Clr Tribe said.

The original motion was carried in about 20 seconds with no debate and full agreement from all councillors, including Mayor Patricia White.

It would have completed a long-term planning effort to add to Shoalhaven's Local Environmental Plan (LEP) "protection and enhancement of the unique local character and scenic landscapes" in development assessments.

Instead, this latest rescission, lodged three days after Council's meeting, has created delay and mystery over what or who made councillors change their mind.

Mayor White, Deputy Mayor Wilkins and Clr Casmiri signed the rescission motion.

The best-case scenario is that these councillors did not read the papers and now have specific questions that they failed to ask at the last meeting.

Changes now to the planning proposal would delay finalising Shoalhaven's LEP (due by March 14, 2025) and possibly require another public exhibition period.

More extreme would be that the Councillors' change of heart signals an intent not to adopt the local character planning amendment at all.

That "is not the preferred option", according to Council's Strategic Planning department notes (approved by Acting Director of City Futures, Coralie McCarthy), as "Consideration of local character is a key ongoing community concern."

The notes assured that the Planning Proposal (PP) would not slow "diverse housing growth" across Shoalhaven.

"However, the provision of higher density housing needs to be balanced with the consideration of the long-term liveability and sustainability of the communities in which it will be located."

It should have been a no-brainer, right?

Over many years of creating the Community Strategic Plan, Shoalhaven communities have registered significant concerns about the impacts of development on individual areas and the need for strategic plans to "maintain, enhance, and cultivate character and sense of place.

Recognising the unique value of the Shoalhaven LGA, the NSW Department of Planning and Environment partnered back in 2018 with Council and a planning and design consultancy, Roberts Day, to identify the current and desired future character of 57 towns and villages in the Shoalhaven.

In August 2023, Council adopted the document which concluded:

"With a strong unique identity, often influenced by historic and cultural significance, distinct built form, and important landscape and natural environment, these settlements require a highly sensitive approach."

This fits with the NSW government's 2021 planning statement:

"Character is a critical element of local areas and neighbourhoods and needs to be carefully considered in future planning."

The office of the NSW Minister for Planning and Public Spaces directed the Shoalhaven Council to amend its LEP. The planning proposal went on public display in June this year.

Of the 13 submissions received - 10 came from community consultative bodies and individuals supportive of the proposed amendments, but three registered opposition that was addressed before the proposal was tabled for final approval.

Disagreement came, unsurprisingly, from land development consultants Allen Price & Scarratts and property developer Sealark.

As the development arm of the Halloran Trust, one of Shoalhaven's largest private landowners, Sealark has development interests in Culburra Beach, Callala Bay and Beach, Currarong, Vincentia, St Georges Basin, Basin View and Sussex Inlet.

Sealark's submission on local character rejected the planning amendment, saying (among other concerns) that the Culburra Beach character statement was unsuitable and insufficient.

Sealark asserted that focus in all zones should be on "future desired character" not "existing character". Planning staff noted Sealark's concerns but made no changes.

Community Consultative Bodies supported the plan, but not always the Roberts Day descriptions of localities.

The Basin Villages Forum submission noted that contentious yet approved developments persisted and "community dissatisfaction is somewhat of an understatement."

"They cause frustration, stress and disappointment and involve an inordinate amount of time to contest through the likes of meetings, community liaison, submissions and deputations." 

"The PP will only serve its purpose if this changes."

"One clear concern...is the failure of character to be recognised and considered in the Land and Environment Court..."

The BVF submission went on to say that "scenic landscape" should also recognise "instrinsic biodiversity and ecological identity" as remaining vegetation in the Shoalhaven is significant but in danger.

Years of dissent and opposition to Sealark's plan to clear West Culburra forest for a subdivision close to oyster farms have dogged the developer.

Controlling provisions were put in place over impacts to habitat and species, including the Glossy Black Cockatoo, Grey-headed Flying Fox and the endangered Gang-gang Cockatoo.

Last month, Sealark had to publicly display Preliminary Documentation under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) about its 65-hectare housing development plans at West Culburra.

On November 21, Sealark directors Matt Philpott and Doug Marr presented their Culburra plan in a special briefing to the new group of Councillors.

Rebecca Sleath of Culburra Ratepayers and Residents Action Group said it was "unbelievable" that such a briefing could happen and that Councillors need a balanced view to make decisions.

"When is it the community's turn to 'brief' councillors?" Ms Sleath asked.

Oh yes, the community. Remember them?

Planning instruments are designed to guard communities and preserve public interest.

But there exists a default acceptance that even if planning departments say they are working for community, they are, in fact, working closely with property developers who openly pressure governments to satisfy their hunger for profit before protecting communities from being devoured.

"The planners haven't left the room, they're in the room with the developers."
- Prof. Urban Planning History, Karl Fischer

Here in the Shoalhaven, Sealark's developments make money for the Halloran Trust. A major Halloran beneficiary is the University of Sydney's Henry Halloran Research Trust, whose stated goal is, ironically, to promote "innovation and research in town planning, urban development and land management". 

USYD's Halloran Trust writer-in-residence is Dr Elizabeth Farrelly. Well known for her career in media and politics, Farrelly is the founder and CEO of The Better Cities Initiative with a "manifesto" that champions citizen-led design for better cities and healthy neighbourhoods.

"Whatever happened to planning?" Farrelly wrote in an article about Sydney.

"There was a time when planners spoke straight, defended the public, changed the world.

"Being a professional meant standing up for principle not bending over for money - and planning's first principle was public benefit."

Shoalhaven Council's rescission motion on planning for local character is an important test of whether new councillors listen to the community or favour developers.