White Bay consultation not meaningful, says council
- Author:
- Michael Koziol
- Posted:
- Thursday, 9 February 2012
Inadequate consultation with residents is at the centre of the debate around the proposed cruise ship terminal in White Bay.
Sydney Ports has announced two community workshops for residents to discuss options for public access to the proposed terminal. But Leichhardt Mayor Rochelle Porteous said the Ports Authority has failed to conduct “meaningful” consultation.
Leichhardt Council said the scope of the consultation should be widened to include traffic and parking, landscaping and the terminal’s impact on air quality, light and noise.
“We are very disappointed that Sydney Ports did not agree to work constructively with Council,” Ms Porteous said. “We can’t accept that a session looking only at the location of access and restricted to 30 participants selected by Sydney Ports in any way meets community and council expectation in terms of consultation.”
Sydney Ports told City News it tried to cooperate with Leichhardt Council, and started its own consultation process due to a lack of communication.
It said it notified the Council on December 17 of its intention to run community workshops, and did not receive a response for one month.
Cr Porteous said that was misleading, and that Ports never intended substantial community consultation. “They only wanted to consult with officers in council. I said that’s not negotiable. When you consult with Leichhardt Council, you have to communicate with the community.”
The Ports workshop will consist of 12 residents, selected randomly from the 20 who responded to a letterbox invitation, five Leichhardt Councillors, members of the Balmain Rozelle Chamber of Commerce and representatives of the Glebe Island White Bay Community Liaison Group.
Leichhardt Council has meanwhile begun its own series of consultative workshops; one took place on February 7 and another two are scheduled for February 20 and March 5.
In an email to City News, Sydney Ports said: “It would serve no valid purpose to double up on public meetings.”
Friends of White Bay president Michael Lehmann said the terminal needed to be put on hold so that the government could seek input from the Bays Precinct Task Force and a report on the naval use of Garden Island, currently before Defence Minister Stephen Smith.
The announcement that Thales Australia, a defence contractor, will move its operations away from Garden Island also frees up potential space for cruise ships to dock.
Mr Lehmann said it was good to see consultation being attempted, but it would be better if Ports and Council cooperated.
“We have no idea as to what extent Sydney Ports will take [the findings] on board, or whether it is designed to rubber-stamp what they have proposed,” he said.
“We are a bit dismayed that there are two different processes going. They really should find a way to work together.”
Like this article? Register as a subscriber here. It's free! We'll keep you up to date with new stories on the site.
February 10th, 2012 @ 9:45 am
As a Balmain Resident who is in the immediate vicinity of the White Bay Terminal I am deeply concerned about the lack of Community Participation in the Terminal Relocation Process.
Sydney Ports continues their behaviour of do what we say – the Community representation Process so flawed with Sydney Ports refusing to provide details of the successful Community Representatives on their Workshop last night.
Now, out of the blue, we have the Minister Mr Gay announcing the relocation of Naval Vessels to White Bay to free up Garden Island facilities for the big Cruise Ships.
What happened to the argument the Navy needs to be east of the bridge for defense purposes.
We have been promised a Master plan for years.
Leichhardt Council has been fighting on our behalf for years.
To my knowledge no other Terminal world wide has been positioned in a Residential Area.
The exit points for the Terminal are totally unfeasible.
The Sydney Ports Function Centre will be of no potential benefit to local businesses.
So why does the Community have to where the ad hoc decisions that are occurring at present
The Leichhardt Council Area is third lowest in NSW in required greenspace ratio for it’s Community.
Yet the Community continues to grow in population.
Sydney Ports has no concern regarding further decrease in foreshore greenspace to accommodate the Terminal.
Nowhere is there plans by Sydney Ports to compensate for this loss of greenspace to the Community.
The Planning Minister has a Master Plan Taskforce that is so under-represented with Community Input that it is farsical.
A Master Plan is enacted in law – as such it cannot be changed according to the differing agendas of State Governments, which is what is occurring now.
The Premier and the Minister for Ports are non-compliant with their Sustainability and Community Consultation Policies.
Our Harbour Foreshores are one of our greatest attractions and should be protected from decisions such as these.
February 10th, 2012 @ 10:01 am
As a Balmain Resident who is in the immediate vicinity of the White Bay Terminal I am deeply concerned about the lack of Community Participation in the Terminal Relocation Process.
Sydney Ports continues their behaviour of do what we say – the Community representation Process so flawed with Sydney Ports refusing to provide details of the successful Community Representatives on their Workshop last night.
Now, out of the blue, we have the Minister Mr Gay announcing the relocation of Naval Vessels to White Bay to free up Garden Island facilities for the big Cruise Ships.
What happened to the argument the Navy needs to be east of the bridge for defense purposes.
We have been promised a Master plan for years.
Leichhardt Council has been fighting on our behalf for years.
To my knowledge no other Terminal world wide has been positioned in a Residential Area.
The exit points for the Terminal are totally unfeasible.
The Sydney Ports Function Centre will be of no potential benefit to local businesses.
So why does the Community have to where the ad hoc decisions that are occurring at present
The Leichhardt Council Area is third lowest in NSW in required greenspace ratio for it’s Community.
Yet the Community continues to grow in population.
Sydney Ports has no concern regarding further decrease in foreshore greenspace to accommodate the Terminal.
Nowhere is there plans by Sydney Ports to compensate for this loss of greenspace to the Community.
The Planning Minister has a Master Plan Taskforce that is so under-represented with Community Input that it is farsical.
A Master Plan is enacted in law – as such it cannot be changed according to the differing agendas of State Governments, which is what is occurring now.
The Premier and the Minister for Ports are non-compliant with their Sustainability and Community Consultation Policies.
Our Harbour Foreshores are one of our greatest attractions and should be protected from decisions such as these.