MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE SUFFOLK PARK PROGRESS ASSOCIATION held Thursday 13 December, 2007, at 7pm at the Suffolk Park
Community Hall

The meeting commenced at 7pm.
Peter Stolz began the meeting by inviting those present to view the plans of the DA and the Current list of objections proposed by the SPPA.

For list of objections, see attached file, or go to our website at www.suffolkparkprogressassociation.org.

He also invited those present to add their concerns, or to voice their support in favour of the DA.The following concerns were raised:

  • Flooding of the site:  current flood plain management study is already out of date, with no tracking of recent developments, and no provision for climate change.Therefore they cannot estimate on future developments.
  • If the flow rate is below a certain level, the drainage from the site will be insufficient to avoid flooding. And when the creek flows too fast, what has happened in the past is that the creek mouth at the ocean closes, causing flooding.

Current land acts as drainage reservoir for surrounding area runoff; water from roofs of houses actually runs off faster and is more likely to cause flooding.
Provision for 15m on west side of the creek being recognised as Tallow Creek, but east of the creek is only termed “open drain”, rather than an integral part of Tallow Creek.
There is a need for Byron Shire Council to come up with an updated flood management guideline to be in place before any new DA would be considered.

  • DA seems flawed in many ways, as if roughly put together (eg. Drawings, accuracy, reports)  eg. On two separate plans the bridges across the creek were drawn in differing locations.
  •  The need for affordable housing in Suffolk Park is not addressed.
  • The need for ecologically sustainable development is not fulfilled, especially with renewable energy sources.
  • The increase of foot traffic with bridge access linked to either Beechwood, Oceanside Place and Kalamajere Drive, which would bring people not only from new development but also from Byron Hills/Baywood Chase.

Best plan of action is to refute the current DA , rather than propose alternative;  allow Developers to come back with alternative plans.
We need as many submissions from residents as possible.
Standardised submissions, eg. Form letters, are no longer acceptable as submissions by Council.

Those present were not in favour of the DA as it currently stands; no views in favour were expressed at the Meeting.

The meeting ended at 8.15pm.