Sharks fume as MP deserts project

[Russell Crowe's Band]

i love all resort things

 

[cb4]

What if, and this is just a vision, so run with it... that we have alot of run offs and rain catchment tanks... and build a wet n wild next to our luxury appartment, that uses the rain catchment.

We wont have a flood plain, and it will stop the kids comitting crime in the ghetto. Also provides more jobs and income. Win win win for the shire.

 

[Miller was a legend]

Great idea cb4!

 

[newman]

Are you serious? We have the foremost authority in NSW expressing concern the proposal may in fact direct flooding towards existing residences in North Caringbah and Woolooware and you believe 'it wasn't that much of an issue".

Is this your view or the develolper's as well? You are a representative on a consultative committee. Many Sharks supporters live in these suburbs but oppose the development for this and many other reasons.

It is my view AND the developers view.

concerned that the proposal may be impacted by flooding and may adversely impact on flooding in adjacent properties.

Suitable arrangements for floodwater and overland flow need to be considered from the earliest stages of the design process, particularly when the site is identified as being on a floodplain. Otherwise adverse effects on flood behaviour might prove difficult to rectify.

This letter only states that the site might change the water flow should something be built, just like every other building around the foreshore....

Do you think that Bluestone are so unprofessional that they are not aware of these documents? Do you actually think that they did not make suitable arrangements for floodwater and overland flow in the initial application (in its earliest stages)? This what I have said all along; They are aware of the flood issues, have catered the dev app with it in mind and have moved along accordingly. There are also a raft of limitations placed on the site because of its previous use as a tip. They have addressed those and moved on too. Just like the limitations because of the sandy soil. Issue addressed, and moved along.

I honestly, really, dont know what you are trying to prove with this flood stuff. If this can get built, then the Sharks development (on a site which has never been flooded) is a shoe in.

 

[Miller was a legend]

I think I see Ian thorpe in there!

 

[Perth Red]

Cracking water polo stadium, where is it?

 

[Russell Crowe's Band]

nah

its the set for the new nitro circus water show.

Travis Pastrana is going to wakeboard on the back of a real life bull shark

 

[kmav23]

I never ridiculed you. I said all along that the developers had made concessions for flooding, and it wasnt that much of an issue. Thats why there is no underground car park in the plan.

While you were on the website did you see that submissions in favour of the development represent about 60% of all submissions received? When you consider that in most cases, the standard benchmark is 90% of all submissions are opposed to developments, this is pretty exciting stuff.

And: On Sunday there was the worlds first rally in favour of a project development. How do you feel about your potential new neighbours?

there more people at ALDI

 

[Miller was a legend]

The criminal justice system sucks

 

[cb4]

Just moving away from this topic of debate, how many people got text messages about this rally.

The one I got said "please attend in no sharks colours, this is community based not football based."

I know the CSSC didnt want people in colours, and yest I see CSSC jerseys, and Sharks signs being paraded.

Organisation fail on our behalf imo.

 

[Ausguy]

shut up cb4 ya dickead.

 

[carcharias]

Just moving away from this topic of debate, how many people got text messages about this rally.

The one I got said "please attend in no sharks colours, this is community based not football based."

I know the CSSC didnt want people in colours, and yest I see CSSC jerseys, and Sharks signs being paraded.

Organisation fail on our behalf imo.

I didn't get a text MSG
I am not cssc though.
2 blokes I know who are in it didn't wear footy stuff.
I am in that pic

 

[Perth Red]

I never ridiculed you. I said all along that the developers had made concessions for flooding, and it wasnt that much of an issue. Thats why there is no underground car park in the plan.

While you were on the website did you see that submissions in favour of the development represent about 60% of all submissions received? When you consider that in most cases, the standard benchmark is 90% of all submissions are opposed to developments, this is pretty exciting stuff.

And: On Sunday there was the worlds first rally in favour of a project development. How do you feel about your potential new neighbours?

TBF the majority are demonstrating/voting to save the Sharks rather than to support the development par se. If the Sharks were not benefitting do you think they would have turned up to support the developers?

Good that the fans are getting behind something that helps secure their future but lets not be foolish enough to think the people of the area feel the development will be a major benefit to the whole community.

 

[kmav23]

Just moving away from this topic of debate, how many people got text messages about this rally.

The one I got said "please attend in no sharks colours, this is community based not football based."

I know the CSSC didnt want people in colours, and yest I see CSSC jerseys, and Sharks signs being paraded.

Organisation fail on our behalf imo.

I got a text message saying cronulla sucks

 

[Miller was a legend]

I got a text message saying cronulla sucks

Is this bloke 12 years old or something like that?

 

[carcharias]

TBF the majority are demonstrating/voting to save the Sharks rather than to support the development par se. If the Sharks were not benefitting do you think they would have turned up to support the developers?

Good that the fans are getting behind something that helps secure their future but lets not be foolish enough to think the people of the area feel the development will be a major benefit to the whole community.

Foolish?
What would you really know about what people in the shire think?
Pretty sure most people are smart enough to work out that the development
will improve the place .
Try shopping up that end of the shire
Try grocery shopping in general anywhere between Caringbah and woolooware.

 

[R2Coupe]

It is my view AND the developers view.


This letter only states that the site might change the water flow should something be built, just like every other building around the foreshore....

Do you think that Bluestone are so unprofessional that they are not aware of these documents? Do you actually think that they did not make suitable arrangements for floodwater and overland flow in the initial application (in its earliest stages)? This what I have said all along; They are aware of the flood issues, have catered the dev app with it in mind and have moved along accordingly. There are also a raft of limitations placed on the site because of its previous use as a tip. They have addressed those and moved on too. Just like the limitations because of the sandy soil. Issue addressed, and moved along.

I honestly, really, dont know what you are trying to prove with this flood stuff. If this can get built, then the Sharks development (on a site which has never been flooded) is a shoe in.

Newman - OEH does not believe the flood issues have been addressed at all. Read below -

OEH state "OEH requirements were not fully represented in the final DGRs".

OEH further states "While the EA's Draft Statement of Commitments identifies the need for a detailed flood assessment in future applications for the development, the flood assessments should be undertaken at the intitial conceptual stage. On this basis, it is not possible for the OEH to adequately review the impact of flooding on the development or the mitigation options presented".

What this means is "OEH's flood concerns raised in its letter of 25 March 2011 are therefore still valid and will form the basis of its review of the future detail flood modelling.".

 

[newman]

What on earth are you talking about. The PAC (who will make the final determination) haven't even looked at the application yet, that stage starts after Dec 5, when they consider the application and the community submissions all at once.

 

[Russell Crowe's Band]

TBF the majority are demonstrating/voting to save the Sharks rather than to support the development par se. If the Sharks were not benefitting do you think they would have turned up to support the developers?

nah.

but if we werent in the bind we are in...

its hard to say what we would be doing with it. probably the same. but maybe different.

maybe capsized resort thing.

and it would be a good community utility. new shops/restaurants and a medical centre. a different liscenced club that moves away from total relience of poker machines.the residential part is housing. whatever. is what it is.

 

[Miller was a legend]

Newman - OEH does not believe the flood issues have been addressed at all. Read below -

OEH state "OEH requirements were not fully represented in the final DGRs".

OEH further states "While the EA's Draft Statement of Commitments identifies the need for a detailed flood assessment in future applications for the development, the flood assessments should be undertaken at the intitial conceptual stage. On this basis, it is not possible for the OEH to adequately review the impact of flooding on the development or the mitigation options presented".

What this means is "OEH's flood concerns raised in its letter of 25 March 2011 are therefore still valid and will form the basis of its review of the future detail flood modelling.".

George,

I just don't get your point. So what (re; above)? Do you really think these developers don't know what they are doing?