Owen promises rescission motion as Tweed Council vote against ‘temporary’ Tringa St access

The controversial development application (DA) for changing the access route for the zombie industrial development at 60 Tringa Street, Tweed Heads was debated at yesterday’s Tweed Council planning meeting and was rejected on the mayor’s casting vote. 

The 37 lot industrial subdivision at 60 Tringa Street was seeking a ‘temporary’ access to the site as a ‘modification’ to the DA. Concurrently the developers are applying for the same route to be a permanent access via the Environment Protection & Biodiversity Act (EPBC). referral that is now before the federal government.

The staff recommended approval was moved by councillors Rhiannon Brinsmead (Liberal) and Reece Byrnes (Labor) before an amendment for refusal was moved by Mayor Chris Cherry (Independent) and seconded by Cr Nola Firth (Greens).

Is it the same DA?

A key element to the decision to approve or reject the application was whether to determine the application for a temporary access as a ‘modification’ to the existing DA or if a ‘new DA’ should be submitted.

‘This is a tricky one for us as a council,’ explained Cr Cherry. 

‘I find it a difficult one to determine. We have a development that has been approved in 1996. We were advised that in looking at the assessment of this particular modification that we need to look at whether there’s been minimal environmental impact and when we look at that, then we compare it to the consent that was modified in 2012. 

‘Then we look at whether it’s substantially the same development, and when we look at that then we have to compare it to the original development as approved in 1996. And when I’m looking at the assessment report, I don’t believe that it has been sufficiently demonstrated that this DA, and the one that was originally approved in 1996, are substantially the same development.’

The Mayor also pointed out that if approved this DA modification would impact the tidal channel and ‘require the removal of 1,100 square metres of vegetation. Some of that is on the council’s sewage treatment plant, some of that is on the [DA] site’. 

Original DA specified the access

The original DA in 1996 specifically required the developer to buy the land for and build an alternative access route. The developer was required to purchase council land for a dedicated road, which they did and this was designated in 2000. However, they have never built the road on the southern boundary and are now seeking to move the access route to this new location on the north-east boundary.

New DA says Mayor

‘I believe that it needs to be treated as as a new DA and given a full test of the impacts and I think that there is an opportunity here for a good environmental outcome because this site is an incredibly sensitive site. It is right on the banks of the Cobaki Broadwater. It has a tidal channel running along the north and it has a water body that’s on there already.’

In 2019 the application for a temporary access approval on the proposed ‘temporary’ route had not been completed as ‘essential energy infrastructure was in the way and needed to be removed’. Cr Cherry pointed out that this was still an issue but had not been addressed in this application. 

‘There’s too many things that haven’t been answered,’ she said. 

Cr Firth pointed out that there were currently three applications underway: the temporary one under discussion, the permanent one with the EPBC and the one submitted within the last 48 hours to council for a permanent access along this temporary route.

‘The federal [application] needs to be resolved before anything else happens,’ said Cr Firth. 

Cr Firth noted that there were threatened species in the area, that it is a New South Wales class one fishery area, and that there was the possibility for parts of it to be put into the Ramsay Wetlands for migratory birds.

Rescission motion on the table

Conservative councillor Warren Polglase was absent from the meeting and Cr James Owen (Liberal) spoke against the refusal telling the council that he had spoken to some locals and that there were only a few locals that were concerned about it. 

Once again Cr Owen talked about the expertise of staff and supporting what they have put forward, which he highlights when he has a motion he wants to get up but fails to follow when he disagrees with the staff position. 

Cr Owen also pointed out that one of the key voices in opposition to the approval of the temporary access was on the Mayors election ticket. While he didn’t name the individual and cut off the Mayor’s response to the comment during her right of reply, Lindy Smith president of the Tweed District Residents Association and Ratepayers contacted The Echo and clarified that ‘I was a community representative on the mayor’s ticket’. 

‘The mayor’s ticket is solely made up of long time community representatives for a community voice in council. All the work I do is voluntary and while James Owen spruiked that he has talked to the residents the local residents who have key concerns say they have not been contacted by him.’

‘My view is this will happen anyway,’ said Cr Owen. 

‘So I’m also gonna [be] foreshadowing a rescission motion if this goes ahead, which will mean that we’ll have to bring it back to a future meeting.’

The Mayor pointed out that you couldn’t foreshadow a rescission motion and highlighted that all the councillors accepted that this development would be going ahead. 

‘The message [I’m trying to get] across is there’s a clear planning pathway for putting in the permanent access and I think it would make it a very clear cut and much better way of doing things than doing a modification here. Obviously, we need to see what’s happening in the EPBC application as well.’

The refusal was carried with councillors Owen, Brinsmead and Reece against and councillors Cherry, Firth and Dennis in favour and the mayors casting vote in favour carried the decision for refusal.