Letters
- Author:
- Shant Fabricatorian
- Posted:
- Thursday, 17 September 2009
Continued claims that Council has not consulted with the community about the soil remediation works and landscaping upgrades to the Orphan School Creek and Wood Street sites (‘The path to nowhere?’, September 10) are simply not correct. When this matter came before Council late 2008, and again early this year, I undertook a lengthy review of all the background documentation. It was apparent that consultations on the Masterplan dated as far back as March 2003 when the site was under the jurisdiction of Leichhardt Council.
Since amalgamation and the transfer of the site to the City of Sydney, the records show consultations occurring on September 21, 2006 at a community meeting at Glebe Town Hall, and again when the original DA was exhibited in March/April 2007. In fact, the exhibition period was extended to May 15 at the express wish of the community.
Once again, several residents addressed the Committee when the DA for a particular section came before Council in August 2007. The DA was subsequently approved by unanimous resolution.
In October 2007, there was a community open day with the concept plans for the playground and open space on view and open for comments. Consultation panels were on display at Glebe Library, One Stop Shop and Glebe Town Hall in November 2007 with staff available to answer questions and receive comments. These concept plans were subsequently approved by Council in February 2008.
Outside of these formal processes, I attended several on-site meetings in November 2008 following a request by some residents. I’m aware that several other Councillors made themselves available as well. As a result, Councillors supported a refinement of the landscaping design for the site. Council staff consulted with expert ecologists and arborists to enhance the habitat for wildlife by increasing the native planting area, slightly relocating and reducing the children’s playground, removing two of the original three pathways down to a single accessible pathway and modifying its surface treatment so that it will blend with the natural character of the site. Fully in line with its commitment to keep the wider neighbourhood informed, Council distributed letters to inform everyone of these changes.
It was clear at the Council discussion on March 16, 2009 that everyone, both Councillors and residents, was in agreement about the merits and value of a wildlife habitat on the site. This was consistent with the unanimous endorsement of the Wildlife Option by Council in August 2007, which dedicated a particular section off Wood Street to habitat. I know that some residents wanted the total area to be a sanctuary but even the 2003 Masterplan indicated the area was intended to provide a playground and open space in conjunction with a wildlife habitat. At all stages, Council has needed to balance competing viewpoints when devising any plans, and this is demonstrated in the final design. With work on the site now drawing to a close I believe this natural area in the midst of the inner-city will come to be appreciated by everyone in the neighbourhood.
Cr Di Tornai
Like this article? Register as a subscriber here. It's free! We'll keep you up to date with new stories on the site.
September 22nd, 2009 @ 1:02 pm
Councillor Di Tornai still misses the point, and her monotonous account of “public consultation” (City News 17/9/09) only serves to highlight how spectacularly she and Clover Moore have failed in the Orphan School Creek Gully.
What should have been a great environmental achievement and a tribute to community vision is instead a dog’s breakfast, a camel, a miserable disappointment and an insult to those who fought tirelessly for almost a decade to secure a future for this space.
What was sold to us as predominantly native habitat now resembles a fence farm or a barely disguised skate ramp. Locals despair when recalling the lush gully canopy that has been sacrificed for a barren embankment scarred with concrete. We traded a treasured wild space for the Council’s promise of native greenery (enduring years of dust and bulldozers along the way) only to end up with a tangle of fences, concrete and absurd follies. Oh, and a few trees too, almost like after-thoughts.
If Councillor Tornai thinks the Orphan School Creek Gully is the product of public consultation, then how did the council fall so pitifully short of public expectation?
Jon Murrie
Forest Lodge