Sharks fume as MP deserts project

[rednblack]

Until this point you presented a very balanced and fair opinion.

Now i know you are just like every other mug on here that labels people based on the actions of few. Great way to live your life.

Congratulations.

Nothing personal mate, just pointing out that the actions of the few have reflected poorly on the masses.

 

[SharkShocked]

How you get that from his post amazes me.

He is obviously saying they clearly organized their statements before making them. Reading them it's an absolute certainty. He said nothing about them not saying it just that they clearly teamed up.

^^^^


R2Coupe - is your profession politics?? Else i cannot see how you could possibly spin my post into what you questioned.

 

[rednblack]

Fantastic post oz

Kiamasaint I'm not offended at all. The only thing that angers me is opposition based on people's opinions rather than real fact.

^^^

Also oz, and I'm sorry if you've already mentioned (I must've missed it if you did), but what is your profession?

 

[roofromoz]

^^^

Also oz, and I'm sorry if you've already mentioned (I must've missed it if you did), but what is your profession?

Town planner in local government. I mostly do assessment of DAs, so I know a bit about this stuff.

 

[snoozer]

It must sux being a Sharks fan, having people deathriding your team, questioning whether the club's lifeline is viable,

it's a rollercoaster for sure.but we're used to it-it's been going on for years.

how many other teams fans have a confirmed idiot number?!


if this development goes through we'll finally have a chance at being a stable and competitive.

if it doesn't we're farked.

hence most of us have more than a passing interest in the process of this development.

 

[R2Coupe]

It just requires them to give an assessment.

Do you know if the assessment came back as an issue or non-issue?

I have to let you know that I have had to deal with the EPA on these grounds on a regular basis for over a year. I put in all the services for the new grandstand and lighting around the ground, which meant I had to deal with the mangroves environment constantly. I also built the Fitness First which is nearly living amongst the groves its so close.
The whole time in my dealing with them they not once said it was a flood plain, it was a tidal area.

The requirements will need to be addressed by the developer. But it is not that straight forward apparently. There is the zoning issue which does not allow residential and retail on the site. There is also the issue of development of a centre away from established centres and the economic impact of this proposal on existing centres. Flooding is but one issue.

 

[snoozer]

flooding is not an issue.

 

[R2Coupe]

Go read the requirements again. It is an issue which needs to be addressed.

 

[R2Coupe]

It is obvious R2Coupe can't read and understand public development documents.

The flood issue can be addressed simply as "N/A"

The rest of the criteria would then be addressed by the developer.

SO wrong again Coupe.

Want to try anything else?

According to law it has to be addressed by the developer as a Director Generals Requirement. You have the link, read it for yourself. Or have someone do it for you

Wasn't it you who said the economic impact on existing centres it not an issue which has to be considered? It's back earlier in this thread posted by you but again it is clearly in the Director Generals Requirements.

You never know, one day you may get things right. Better off counting your fingers and toes.

 

[carcharias]

So is it on a floodplain
Yes
Or
No

Simple question for you coupe

 

[rednblack]

The flood issue can be addressed simply as "N/A"

Man, do you really think it's that simple? I can't tell.
If you completely ignored a requirement like that, they wouldn't even read past it! They'd throw it back at you and say "FAIL".
Even when flooding is not an issue, evidence of such must still be provided to support your case. Engineer and Hydrologist's reports would be required I'd imagine too.
To say "N/A" to a development ALONG THE WATER'S EDGE would be suicidal to the developer/club, even if this is in fact the case.

 

[Ausguy]

Rednblack are you a local resident ?

 

[rednblack]

Rednblack are you a local resident ?

No mate. Central Coast.
And as stated before, I have nothing for/against the proposal going ahead.

 

[Ausguy]

No drama I just wasn't sure.

 

[Eion]

Here we still are on flood. If the Opera House goes under will this be as a result of 'flood' or 'ocean movement'? This development is subject to potential sea inundation like everywhere coastal. River flood, like what happened to suncorp, is not an issue.

 

[Ausguy]

As I said earlier I'm not getting into development arguments on here anymore.

Fact is the experts will decide.

 

[jc155776]

According to law it has to be addressed by the developer as a Director Generals Requirement. You have the link, read it for yourself. Or have someone do it for you

Wasn't it you who said the economic impact on existing centres it not an issue which has to be considered? It's back earlier in this thread posted by you but again it is clearly in the Director Generals Requirements.

You never know, one day you may get things right. Better off counting your fingers and toes.

Economic impacts is different to increased competition you idiot.

Economic impacts can include the positives of increased work, more potential customers etc.

NEgatives do not include falling pattonage due to competition. That is against the law.

You also keep repeating this f**king flood issue when you are 100% wrong. Addressing something can be as simple as saying Not applicable! Brick wall stuff with you isn't it.

No doubt you are some kind of retired primary school teacher who thinks they know everything.

 

[jc155776]

Here we still are on flood. If the Opera House goes under will this be as a result of 'flood' or 'ocean movement'? This development is subject to potential sea inundation like everywhere coastal. River flood, like what happened to suncorp, is not an issue.

But its a flood plain!! Capsis said so and it has to be addressed so its a flood plain!!!

 

[shaggs]

But its a flood plain!! Capsis said so and it has to be addressed so its a flood plain!!!

Won't somebody think of the children.

 

[jc155776]

Floooooooooooooooooods!!!