At Tuesday night’s Randwick Council meeting (24th July) Councillors were asked to support the following recommendation (as contained in this report on the Botany Cemetery Trust proposal to takeover 60%+ of the Market Gardens):
a) Council resolve that the proposal proceed to Gateway for determination under section 56 of the EP & A Act, subject to the Applicant preparing an amended planning proposal which addresses outstanding heritage and other issues identified in this report, and resubmit those documents to Council and the Department for consideration prior to exhibition of the revised planning proposal.
b) Council’s correspondence to the Gateway should clearly articulate the matters to be addressed through further investigations as identified in this report.
c) Council acknowledge the advice of the NSW Heritage Council and seek to work collaboratively with the Heritage Council and the Applicant in the development of the Conservation Management Plan.
There were 14 Councillors present:
Councillors Belleli, Seng, White, Bowen, Tracey, Matson, Hughes and Woodsmith voted for Option 4 which rejected the Cemetery proposal outright and supported the RU4 re-zoning determined at Council meeting of 22/5/2012.
Councillors Nash, Smith, Procopiadis, Matthews, Andrews and Stevenson voted against Option 4 indicating they would vote for the recommended option (as above) – Option 2 – if it were put. This was the option that Cemetery supporters were urging Councillors to accept and it would have given a clear message that Council accepted in principle the proposal and that there was ‘just a bit of work’ needed to finalise it. The local community are experienced with developments presented like this, eg Prince Henry,Little Bay Cove,Orica Southlands. They have already had 4 years of consultation on the Market Gardens starting with the Lands Assessment of 2008 which recommended against cemetery uses. This report was ‘revised in 2010. Read a comparison of the two reports and wonder at the motivation behind the ‘change of heart’ in Crown Lands. Note that the Minister at the time (for both Lands and Planning) was Tony Kelly who has since appeared before ICAC and subsequently been expelled from the Labour Party.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
REMINDER
Independent Planning Consultant (for Randwick Council’s LEP)
Ms Tina Spiegel was appointed by Council to run the public hearing, given her combined expertise as a lawyer, town planner and mediator specialising in development, town planning and environmental law. Ms Spiegel confirmed that she had no conflict of interest in matters concerning Council in general and in particular matters relevant to the draft LEP. This is what she recommended on the Market Gardens: “ Although there was a convincing and valuable representation by some speakers that the land should be used as a cemetery, the valuable contribution of urban agricultural lands should not be underestimated. The use of part of the land for cemetery purposes may only be a very short term solution for the problem of where to bury the dead.Under these circumstances it is considered that the proposed rezoning of the land to RU4 may be supported because it is a long term sustainable solution.”
…………………………………………………………………………………………………….
In the Randwick City Council eNews released on 25 July the report on the vote read:
“Council last night voted to reject a planning proposal to expand the Eastern Suburbs Memorial Park into the neighbouring Chinese Market Gardens site on Bunnerong Road, Phillip Bay. The proposal sought to rezone 60 per cent of the Chinese Market Gardens site for cemetery use.The land has a long history of use as a market garden, and is listed as a state significant heritage item, as well as a local heritage item in Council’s planning controls. It was also listed by the National Trust on their national heritage register this year.”
The Mayor’s (Scott Nash) Media Release also of 25 July includes the statement:
“The ESMP planning proposal, lodged with Council and assessed by an independent expert planner, proposed co-existing with the market gardens as well as providing publicly accessible pathways near Yarra Creek and creating stormwater basins and ecological habitats within the market gardens land.”
Extensive modifications are required to accommodate graves on this floodplain site. The assessor noted that possibly 70% of the current gardens would be alienated making it impossible for both farming families to continue. Given the work involved -and local community do have experience of major works along Bunnerong over the past 3 years – it is unlikely that either farming family could continue. Perhaps the The Trust’s idea of co-existence is to reduce the Market Gardens to a series of interpretative panels and claim this as ‘heritage’.
In the Southern Courier report written after the Council meeting, journalist Leesa Smith wrote that ”Residents will not get the chance to have their say on the Eastern Suburbs Memorial Park’s expansion after Randwick Council rejected the proposal at tonight’s council meeting.”
As comment writers noted (below the article), the local community has been ‘consulted to death’ on this subject. The Botany Cemetery Trust and their masters in Crown Lands have a problem accepting NO – a sentiment expressed many time by community and their representatives over the past 4 years.
The Cemetery Trust does not need to go to the State Government. It could be a good neighbour and look elsewhere for suitable sites as well as lobby, with Council and community support, for legislation that realistically addresses the future need for burial space.
Randwick Council handballs Botany cemetery expansion proposal to the state government, 25 July, Leesa Smith, Southern Courier
Eight out of 14 councillors decided not to put a recommendation forward to the state government, with some councillors convinced the government, as the landlord of the Crown land, had already made up its mind that the proposal would go ahead. Residents will not get the chance to have their say on the Eastern Suburbs Memorial Park’s expansion after Randwick Council rejected the proposal at tonight’s council meeting.
The Eastern Suburbs Memorial Park Trust submitted a planning proposal to Randwick Council seeking to rezone approximately 60 per cent of the adjoining Chinese Market Garden site at Bunnerong Rd, Matraville to facilitate the expansion of the Eastern Suburbs Memorial Park (ESMP) cemetery.
The council report, conducted by APP Corporation planning consultant Clare Brown, said rezoning of part of the Chinese Market Garden site to accommodate an expansion of the ESMP cemetery would deliver a benefit to the community.
“This community benefit must however be weighed against the loss of a significant part of an existing piece of community infrastructure which is recognised for its social, cultural and heritage significance to Sydney and the Aboriginal and Chinese communities,” Ms Brown said. “It also needs to be balanced against the loss of the agricultural land use conducted on site which contributes daily to the production of vegetables to the Sydney market.”
Ms Brown said the planning proposal presented a compelling argument for the expansion of the cemetery onto the market garden land but it fell short in terms of a conservation management plan and engineering investigations into what land that could be suitable for burial purposes and what could be utilised for ongoing agricultural purposes.
She found cemetery uses could be compatible with market garden uses and recommended the council note the deficiencies in the ESMP proposal, including the need to prepare a conservation management plan for approval by the NSW Heritage Council, and forward it to state government for a gateway determination.
If the state government gave a tick to the gateway proposal it would then have come back to Randwick Council and been subject to community consultation.
But the majority of councillors ignored the recommendation, opting instead to hand it over to the state government with no attempt to influence the final decision.
Labor councillor Tony Bowen spoke of the “elephant under the carpet” – that the state government wanted the plans to go ahead.
“They want us to do the heavy lifting and that in itself is a problem,” he said.
Fellow Labor councillor Alan White agreed that the state governement “are going to do it, so let them do it”.
But Labor councillor Geoff Stevenson believed that the council had to make a decision “no matter how long it takes”.
Greens councillor Murray Matson said the council had to make a stand or “other councils will not aspire to do so” in the future.
Disappointed and surprised by the move, the Eastern Suburbs Memorial Park CEO George Passas described council’s decision to bypass community consultation as “shoddy civic duty”.
“The community have lost their consultative thread through their council,” he said. “It says to the government that council as a collective is not capable of making a decision.”
Matraville precinct chair Carlos Da Rocha was pleased with the decision but admitted the result could have been better.
“The councillors have heard us speaking and they have spoken loud and clear,” he said. “The state government now needs to make the right decision.”
TELL US WHAT YOU THINK OF THE COUNCIL’S DECISION BELOW:
- Posted on25 Jul 12 at 01:53pm
-
How can the Courier possibly make the statement that ‘Residents will not get the chance to have their say on the Eastern Suburbs Memorial Park’s expansion” when for months there have been copious amounts of letters, petitions, meetings and opinions, from all and sundry, on both sides of the argument. Rather than residents not having a say this argument has been done to death and it’s time the market gardeners were permitted to carry on with their livlihood without the ESMP shadow hanging over them. Helen Francey
- Ian Rosewrites:
Posted on25 Jul 12 at 01:32pm -
Last nights decision to by Council to support option 4 is the right action to be taken, as now the issue is in an even more public arena.
It is way more in our community’s interest to have the Eastern Suburbs Memorial Park utilise nearby former industrial sites for their expansion rather than wasting valuable fresh food growing land. Especially as food security becomes an ever more pressing issue, not to mention food travel miles.
If the ESMP is really interested in being a supporting asset to the community, they could do no better than rehabilitating nearby former industrial estates. As not only would they be value adding for all, there is really no better way to revitalise these areas than a Memorial Park.
I hope last nights decision wakes up the ESMP to look elsewhere as rehabilitating former industrial lands is giving back to our community.
I am asking the ESMP to please recognise our community’s desire for & the importance of locally grown fresh food.
When ESMP looks elsewhere, they will have a much more credible standing within the community because they will truly be adding value. Who wants to keep a former industrial site as is !?
- Andrew Woodhouse Australian Heritage Institutewrites:
Posted on25 Jul 12 at 01:12pm -
Any claim the community is being left out of the democratic process and “wil not get the chance to have their say over Randwick council’s rejection of the cemetery’s proposal to take over 60% of a small, viable farming business is a nonsense on stilts.
There have been thousands of for and against letters, huge public petitions, letters, heritage group submissions, on-line comments, e-mails, community meetings called by the cemetery and at least three previous council meetings involving the public to my knowledge. It’s almost democracy-overload.
Council’s comprehensive 52-page rejection of the cemetery’s proposal should cause it to re-think its own avarice.
Andrew woodhouse President Australian Heritage Institute email: heritageandconservation@hotmail.com
- Lynda Newnamwrites:
Posted on25 Jul 12 at 12:17pm -
Option 4 which had the majority support reiterated previous decisions of Council, i.e. that they (in response to community consultation over the past 4 years) want the full 7ha protected under RU4 zoning.
Communities around here have gone through similar processes many times where the proponent doesn’t accept NO and just keeps chipping away, eg. Ports, Orica, Landcom’s Prince Henry. Councillors have heard the voices of their local residents already what we need now is transparency in this process, particularly from state agencies like Crown Lands.
What was disappointing last night were the councillors who dismissed the value of the contribution that the current gardeners make to our community and to Randwick’s commitment to local sustainability. Both Gordon and Terry Ha, second generation farmers of this land, were in the audience listening.
thank you Councillors who voted to protect the la perouse market gardens, now it’s up to the state government.
It was a good night on Tuesday night, we got the right vote, it would. Be great to have more councillors in support but hopefully this may still happen, other land needs to be searched for cemetery use not this asset, treasure called the la perouse market gardens
Thank you all Councillors that voted for the la perouse market gardens at tuesday nights council meeting, let’s hope that the state government will do the right thing and protect the gardens, Councillors that voted against the market gardens please support the future of the gardens, The previous State Governments should have planned for the future regarding land suitable for cemetery use, the la perouse market gardens should not ever again be put at risk, I have worked for local government or 25 years last nights meeting was interesting to say the least. Randwick Council has great Councilors most of you if not all are great councillors and ver motivated to o he best you can for us. Councillors thank you for supporting the la perouse Market Gardens, In 10 years or a little more from now you will be very proud of our decision to fight for and save the la perouse market gardens and we are proud of you for doing it, it’s not about religion it’s about preservation, state government now needs to finish this off and protect the la perouse e market gardens for ever. It’s the right thing to do.
Hi, friends, neighbours and all that signed the petition to save the la perouse market gardens, people from near and far have made contact and wanted to know what they could do to help, you did it it, we did it , councillors id it but it’s not over yet, thank you councillors who voted for the protection of the la perouse market gardens,the petition process was criticized, it was said that the petition type used supports illicit drugs amongst other things, this is crazy, we felt it was an insult to the people, the petition was about the gardens and the gardens only, 4 days ove 1000 people put names address, email to the petitions, thank you, the photos I have sent many of you is what’s at stake, 150 + years of history, there was a lot of silly stuff going on at the council meeting, some of the things said was a little sad to say the least, we expect a lot of our councillors, we want to be proud of you, you are elected as councillors to a great council being Randwick City Council, you have a great General manager,you have great staff supporting the local communities, please think about what’s at stake the la perouse market gardens must remain not 40% but the entire lot of 100%. Other land needs to be searched for cemetery use, not this land we call the la perouse market gardens, please councillors look out for our future, the market gardens are a tressure to us all, preserve and protect for now a d future generations. Councillors who voted for the gardens on tuesday night thank you, councillors who voted against please change your minds, it’s not to late any other council, if they had what Randwick City Council has such as the la perouse market gardens would never put it at risk of reduciding anyPart of the market gardens. It must remain a part of our future for new and future generations. Just a bit of information for you to consider, we need to look at our history and look into the future. Preserve and protect for future generations.
Gordon Ha is a second generation Chinese Market Gardener on Botany Bay Sydney. He and brother Terry provide fresh produce to local outlets. The farm has been a market garden for over 150 years.
Mr Mayor Scott Nash, Councillors, Please Dont let this great use of land be reduced to a portion, We need it to be a part of our future, This is what makes Randwick Council a great Council and Great area to live, We have everything, open space, National parks, history, great communities spirit. Protect, preserve, look after, look into the future we need this growers gardens to be a part of our development into the future. Randwick Council please save this tressure called the la perouse market gardens, the vote on Tuesday night was the right vote, i have sent all councillors many pictures of the la perouse market gardens, you have seen what we are trying to protect what we want for you to protect the market gardens
SAVE THE LA PEROUSE MARKET GARDENS
Councillors on Tuesday you will with your votes be deciding on the future of the market gardens , please remember this is about protection of great land used to grow fresh produce, great land that will have great future use, great land that can incorporate communities, schools, young, old everyone from all religions, beliefs, cultures and more to learn how to grow vegetables, herbs other, we can learn from Terry and Gordon Ha who have so much to teach and so much experience to pass on to us, it’s the right thing to do to save the gardens, other land needs to be searched for cemetery use to create a new cemetery or expand cemeteries with less impacts on prime land and local thriving communities, protect and preserve the la perouse market gardens it has over 150years of history and needs 150years more for now and future generations.
We need your help to protect our future for future generations. Please pass it on, please write in council, councillors to the southern courier, to the minister, to the local member Michael Daley, be heard save the market gardens,regards, carlos.
Hi all please don’t think that you can not make a difference, it starts with one and becomes many, be communities strong, help save this great asset called the La Perouse Growers Gardens, pass it on to your friends and ask them to also write in support of the market gardens, please let the council, councillors , local MP Michael Daley know how you feel about the potential reduction of the market gardens for cemetery expansion, this is not good for our future development of the area and area from near and far, the market gardens which as over 150 years of history must remain and be a part of our growing future, if the cometary is reaching its capacity the other lands with less inapt needs to be looked for not prime land which is used to grow great produce such as herbs, vegetables and other fresh local produce, we must protect and preserve for now and into the future for future generations.
People who attended the Council meeting on Tuesday were very happy with the out come, many have said most of our Councillors are in support of protecting this great asset called the La Perouse Market Gardens, for this we support our Councillors, even those who voted against I believe that when they look back later in times that they will be happy with the decision to save the entire market gardens. now it’s about making sure we continue the fight and write and rally to the state government and responsible ministers and also our Local MP Michael Daley and include Council and Councilors. Protect and preserve for now and future generations.
It was good common sense prevailed council resolved to reject the Cemetery trust planning proposal to take over 60% of land that was just recently after exhaustive consultation with the community to be zoned Rural.
You cannot have cemetery operations on Rural zoning. The cemetery trust requested a spot rezoning. And it failed on council and with majority of petitions supporting protection of LA Perouse Chinese Market Gardens . What ever the council decision was or is the state authorities have the final say as its crown land. The community knows to better protect the market gardens from being developed and taken over by the cemetery that a rejection of the planning proposal was only course of action and was the right decision. Otherwise it would have sent the wrong message to state authorities the way the resent council report contradicted previous council planning report to support only rural use for the land. If the community wanted cemetery use on that land the council and community would not support Rural zoning.
The community knows that if it gave a foot in the door to the cemetery planning proposal that the most likely outcome like the consulting planners report say they can co exist. The community does not agree they could co exist. As taking 60% of the LA Perouse Chinese market gardens would need a 10% buffer leaving only 30% and that would mean one family growing food would be evicted and the other family growing food would not be able to operate without the other and it would not be viable anymore.
It must be noted that during the war and depression the Chinese market gardens growers gave free food to help the people that where starving and had no money from food.
The community realise that the current cemetery can better utilise their site and find other ways to be more sustainable.
What the community didn’t want was that the Chinese Market gardens end up being the burial grown for all of Sydney and that further pressures down the track for the cemetery to acquire more land open space land in our council area.
The community knows destroying an ecological and sustainable long term growing Markets for a bands aid short sited land grab was not the answer.
It would have cause more damage to the area than good.
The cemetery and needs to help the religious needs by better utilising their site which can be insteaded for a for a long long time.
I don’t agree councillors did not do their duty as some have mentioned, I believe they listened to the local communities and read all the cirespondance sent to them it was noted and petitions accepted there was a report that was made public for all to comment and the councillors where ask to make a decision on options available and the majority of councillors decided to vote on the side to reject the submission of the planning proposal full stop.
Councillors stuck by their decision a month ago to make the zoning RU4 rural use only after the community has spoken and councillors made a good decision.
The councillors who support the cemetery had an opportunity to put a rescission motion and they didn’t because they know they would most likely loose again. It was and is the right decision.
The councillors did their duty for the people,they voted and made a decision and I believe it’s the right one for the protection and future of this historical market gardens
We now request that the state authorities listen to the majority of the community that includes the silent majority that are saying all cemeteries need to find how to extend the burials by better using existing site to cater for religious and non religious. And also look at other land with less impacts on local communities and land that is used to grow freh produce,
And that taking rural and open space and detrimentally effecting the amenities of local residents and negatively effective the landscape is a very bad and short sited move. There is land that is better suited for cemetery use away from coastal beach and prime land that is important for our future in growing fresh food for now and into the future
We need to protect our rural zonings and open spaces left and not let them to be developed. For future generations to enjoy and benefit from. Carlos