Trinity Point Mixed Use Development Mod 1

Objection Submission for Trinity Point Mixed Use Development Mod 1.
(SSD-27028161-mod-1)

I would firstly like to raise my concern, that yet again, like cloak work, the Trinity Point foreshore SSD development modification/changes are put up for a short exhibition and submission timeframe during the holidays when people are away or extra busy with children or grandchildren.

This time, submissions also close on the very night the new West Ward councillors take up their new positions. And even though a SSD some seek help from their Councillors who were unavailable. It can be hard to wade through the many pages of documents to try and unearth all the developers changes and consequences often buried or hard to understand. Especially when trust in the system has long gone….. But the one thing we could trust on … is the developers latest modification was another request to upsize by increasing height.

Nearly twenty years of stress and wasted submissions all for this small foreshore area. As the communities hard won protective conditions of approval are just whittled away by the next barrage of modifications and changes to keep upsizing the buildings, reducing setbacks from lake and reducing the tourist component. Reducing the actual amount of recreational useable open foreshore space or adequate community foreshore access to their Council managed foreshore and visitor parking.

The surrounding residential area is zoned low density housing with a max height of 2 stories. This residential areas most precious amenity is the lake, the areas peace and quiet and surrounding natural foreshores and bushland. That’s why people choose to live in this area of sth west Lake Macquarie and not at the top of the Lake or Toronto.

AND NOW WE START ALL OVER-AGAIN
All the previous 19 years of approved plans, and conditions of approval for continual modifications to upsize the development including approved DA’s. When approved many were distressed at the size of the overdevelopment but relieved the stress caused by this development and its constant modifications was finally over. But the developer put all the approvals in the bin because he decided he wanted an even bigger development of high rise buildings on this small patch of foreshore. This new upsized and approved concept plan of now 4x High rise residential buildings with no essential supporting infrastructure, or adequate open useable recreational Foreshore land, no jetty or boat ramp for the 4 new residential high rise buildings or the existing two Trinity Point housing estates or adequate parking or visitor parking. And then there’s the smaller 2x high rise tourist buildings

• It seems ironic that this SSD-27038162-Mod 1 can ever be considered modification 1. When the local community is aware this Mixed use development is a complete overdevelopment of this small foreshore area and is actually 19 years worth of modifications and upsizing. Probably more like modification 101. From small 2 story eco tourist development with foreshore recreational land and public jetty to four residential high rise buildings and 2x high rise tourist buildings, massive marina and helipad which was not prohibited on zone W1 so the EPA put a no fly zone over Bardens Bay and Lake Petite area. The latest modification plans also provide inadequate open recreational space or parking for the size of the development.

• It is even more predictable that the first modification from this developer regarding the new concept plan, is of course another request for even more building height. The local community had been promised when originally two story and then later that no building would be higher than the tree tops and the development would not dominate the vista of the area or cause local amenity problems. So even though these words were apart of the previous approval processes and conditions of approval … it shows the words and approval process means zero. And that is why many in the area I have spoken too are no longer going to waste their time on submissions, approvals statements or conditions of approval that hold no value or credibility and are whisked away with the next modification and rubber stamp.

• It’s my understanding this latest concept plan was approved, not by how many stories but by an absolute maximum height from existing ground level. This was important to those in the community who were aware of a last minute change on the previous concept plan after it was thought to be approved. When a letter appeared on the tracker requesting all mentions of “existing ground level” to be changed to “finished ground level”. Locals were also horrified just to see the amount of fill being trucked into the site to raise the height of low lying land for the present small part time temporary restaurant.

• The community also has been shown many ever changing award winning artist impressions for this foreshore development over the many years and each one just gets bigger and higher. As the Gov kept rubber stamping the modifications. The developer had years to determine the max height from existing ground level for this latest concept plan. The latest concept approval gave a clear max height for the developer to work within. So surely this time the design must change and not the ever growing max height. Other wise where does this planning approval of gross overdevelopment for the area and height increases ever end. In another 19 years with nothing built.? Especially as the original approved heights were 2-3 stories max.

• Many locals also have concerns that the max height from existing ground level must be adhered too. Otherwise will we keep getting height modifications to allow for all the earth fill required on the low lying swamp areas or if the car parking is moved above existing ground level because it’s not cost efficient to maintain an underground car park with constant pumps because of the low lying land and water table. Locals know every time it rains that the low lying foreshore gets boggy and stays boggy because of the underground water.

• The area is environmentally sensitive with Trinity Point’s “No Name” bays salt marsh/wetlands and also the protected from any pots or nets fish breeding grounds of the very shallow and environmentally important Lake Petite just around the corner. And all the sea grasses in the area already suffering and dying from excess storm water pollution and silt. Where in the plan is there room on the foreshore for all the extra storm water runoff squids or ponds to catch and filter the polluted storm water before entering the lake. And I assume like past approvals all the plantings will be native plants suitable to the area to stop garden escape plants becoming problem weeds in the surrounding bushland and State Conservation Land.

• The developer I understand got out of having to pay for the Fishery Rd traffic lights. With a development of this size the trucks involved will quickly damage the existing Morisset Rd already suffering from all the trucks building his housing estates stage 1&2. So the developer should be made to contribute to any repairs during construction of development as well as the essential road works and traffic flow solutions before, during and after. Or the Governemnt should provide the road funding as I would think it would be completely immoral to make the neglected rate payers of this area who never wanted this overdevelopment to pay for any road improvements required to support this huge inappropriate development for this area. Did the traffic counter take into account on this road in and out all the vehicles during construction and for how many years.?

• Over the years there have been many comments from locals that they worry the tourist buildings/hotel will never be built and were just used to get approvals for high density high rise residential housing on the Trinity Point foreshore that would have other wise not been supported at the time. The planning department locked the developer into the 50-50 rule ie the residential must never be more apartments than the tourist apartments. Others have commented over the years that a bigger tourist hotel means the developer gets more residential and are concerned that’s why the hotel kept getting bigger and the height keeps increasing. Will the developer be made to build the tourism buildings before the residential.
• Parking . The existing marina parking is too small and the width of car parking spots is way too narrow for the big regional and rural SUVs. If you park there you can not get out of the car if another large car parks next to you. The developer has boasted that at times the existing small restaurant attracks 1000 people and parking flowed into the narrow residential streets. There is a large carpark on the foreshore now just for the temporary restaurant. If you rely on people using public transport for this development you will have insufficient parking. Even know I know people that can afford to eat their come from different directions in 3 cars for a table for 4.

I oppose the increase in building heights as I feel the currently approved heights are bordering on too high. Further increasing the height would further shadow the surrounding areas.
The developer instead of overstepping their approval should consider reducing the number of floors of their structures to achieve the points put forward in their proposal. Ideally the buildings would be similar in size and scale to those they share the street with, to better maintain the character and scale of the area.
As a condition of approval for their overstepping original height approvals, they should be required to further contribute community infrastructure similar to other developments for the additional scale of the development (road/intersection upgrades, upgrades to surrounding area parks etc)

The Modification Document submitted is totally misleading. Please refer to the attachment

The development is overcapitalising on the site.
The development is already many times higher than permitted in LMCC LEP where a special section was included for Trinity Point
Good building practice in a low-density area would put tall buildings away from the waterfront to provide a vista over the water from local roads and public places. This development reserves views for hotel guests and on site residents only.
Therefore the max height of most buildings should be about 4 floors to avoid overshadowing and blocking views.
The hotel building which needs to be raised because of potential flooding needs to be kept low to reflect the low nature of surrounding natural topography. (4 storeys)
The site does not allow visual access of the lake for the public as the over height buildings twist and overlap each other.
It is not clear when the terms "public" and "visitor" are used in relation to public infrastructure, is it referring to guests of the hotel or the general public?
As the developer has been building at the Trinity Point site for 10 years, no public paths or improvements to the lake environs have been created, so these should be included in the first stage of any development. The developer used this as a sweetener to the locals but many will no longer be around when the buildings are finished, and the developer gets round to creating public amenities.
The developer has made several changes to the development plans, each time surpassing the regulations further than the original. Locals have lost trust in the Planning Department and planners need to understand the position of locals.
It is likely most of the positive opinions to this modification will come from the developer approaching individuals, as has happened in the past. They will highlight jobs and visitor experience while the developer will quote viability. Neither will be affected if this modification is not approved. Genuine local residents will struggle getting access to the submission because of the short exhibition time and complicated access on the Planning Portal.
The top floor of several residential buildings has been planned as public terrace. This will promote parties and loud noise late at night. Sound travels over water so many people around the peninsular will be affected. These terraces have never been highlighted and do not appear in any promotional material either in digital form or on large signs around the neighbourhood. They should be rejected.

I respectfully request the rejection of the development proposal for the following reasons:

Inadequate Infrastructure: The existing road and transport infrastructure is insufficient to support such a large development.

Insufficient Parking: There is a lack of adequate parking facilities in the area, which would exacerbate traffic and accessibility issues.

Height Restrictions: Most buildings in the area are limited to two stories, and this proposal significantly exceeds that limit without justifiable reasoning for increased height.

Lack of Green Space: There is no nearby park space, and the development should include provisions for recreational areas.

Inappropriate Location: Constructing high-density buildings away from the town center is not logical and could lead to further urban sprawl.

Thank you for considering these points.

614 extra car places and multiple story buildings how will our roads cope with this new influx of cars?
We are a quiet area and the height of the new development will allow our properties to be over looked
Traffic congestion getting through Morisset (Dora St) is bad enough or are helicopters that now have restrictions going to be used more.

I object to this proposed development on the basis of the damage increased road traffic on local roads and increased foot traffic around this peninsula area of the the lake would do irreparable damage to the local natural ecosystems. Our existing water pressure is already pathetic and the damage of the increased traffic to surrounding roads that are already substandard would make like unbearable for the local residents. The current roads already develop dangerous potholes at the first sign of rain. The professional fishermen were ordered out of the lake years ago because of the concerns for the damage to the local natural ecosystems. This proposed development would be far more damaging than the local fishermen ever were. This type of major development should be restricted to existing tourist areas like Toronto, Warners Bay and Swansea and not allowed to invade the existing quiet natural residential areas. The long term locals tell me the site has significant importance to the local aboriginal communities. This development would also adversely affect existing traffic bottle necks in areas like Dora St Morisset, Fishery Point Rd past the Bonnells Bay Public School and the southbound trip from Warner’s Bay down the western side of the lake towards Morisset.

I object to the complete SSD process as in my view this particular development application is a matter for Lake Macquarie City Council (who should be well aware of the local conditions and community views). However in this case Council has simply been bypassed by the developer, which could hardly be called Democratic at the local level, as apparently no redress is possible through the Land and Environment Court for decisions made by a remote authority. Nevertheless I have uploaded an objection to (SSD-27028161-Mod-1) in both .doc (which the later versions of Word with extension .docx will read) and .pdf formats, which concentrates on the intention to increase the height of the proposed development by up to 10% above that limited by the concept approval, which apparently by some ‘miracle’ can occur without any additional building materials or impacts????? However a cynic would say I have just wasted my time. Nevertheless the Conclusion to the objection follows:
Conclusion
The proposed development will appear as if it is out of character with the landscape as there is no view of the distant mountain ranges to provide a backdrop. But merely low density housing inter-dispersed with remnant coastal forest along undulating ridges. Thus to my eyes it will appear as an ‘abomination’ on the skyline, which belongs in a city environment alongside other multi-storey buildings. Therefore rather than increasing the height of the buildings it needs to be reduced, so that it better blends in with the landscape. And in doing so the engineering requirements could be carried out in the confines of the top storey while remaining within the limitations of the concept approval.

The developer claims there will be no perceptible impacts generated by the modification however this objection has outlined some associated threats from: light pollution, pollution by sewage, conservation and traffic based on a 5% or 10% increase in occupants, which may or may not occur. Nevertheless as the developer plans to increase the height of the buildings by up to 10% this will require a 10% increase in building materials which must be transported from the vicinity of Morisset Industrial area through town and along Morisset Park Road by heavy vehicles increasing noise in both the State Conservation area, and in residential areas, along with posing a greater danger to lighter vehicles.

For safety reasons it is imperative that construction be delayed until any required infrastructure changes are completed, more especially in the local area but also in Morisset. Finally it should be fairly obvious that I would like to see the development application for modification (SSD-27028161-Mod-1) rejected for the reasons discussed.
Thank you for providing the opportunity to comment and submit this objection

The attachment in one form or another is worth the read, but the Word version is more correct and I am unable to correct some very minor grammatical errors in the .pdf version. Thanks for the interest. Regards John Sullivan, Bonnells Bay.

Submission in opposition to project SSD-27028161-Mod-1 – Trinity Point Mixed Use Development Mod 1.

This project will erode the beauty and the natural character of this gorgeous part of Lake Macquarie. It should never have been approved to be this high, and now for the developer to make it even higher, even more monstrous and out of character, shows how little they understand about what makes this area so wonderful, and how little they care. On top of the fact that it's ill-suited to the area, it's also putting far too much strain on the roads and infrastructure. This is only a small peninsula. The roads will become congested and the wildlife will die in increasingly higher numbers – a tragedy that can never be undone. Please listen to the community and do not approve this development! We don't want it.

I object to the current proposal on the grounds it will harm the lake with the number of people that will be in this development.

Once again this project has a major change to it. The fix for their problem is quite simple, DROP a floor off the project. This has been going on for many years and each time it has an amendment approved they change it again. One of my major concerns of this project is the amount of traffic that will be travelling down a very poorly surfaced road, between 600 and 1000 cars per day, especially at weekends. The damage that will be done to this road by the construction traffic alone will make it into a goat track. I for one will not be paying anymore in rates to fix their problem which should be at the sole expense of the Developer. As a local resident I am struggling to find why this area is targeted for tourist's as the only local thing to do is walk through the Morisset Park Conservation Area which is a dangerous walk due to Dirk Bike riders (nearly been hit 3 times by them and you wouldn't want to lose a tourist)) and Tics ( they hurt, I know I have had one). The local waterways are not a place I would swim as it is a breeding ground for sharks and other aquatic creatures.
I think most locals know this will be pushed through no matter what we say but I ask you to think long and hard before you allow this development to proceed with their new plans. It is also noted that these changes were sent to us during a holiday period when a lot of people are away with a short reply time.
I thank you for your time,
Dave Pickard

This project will improve the community in several ways:
1. The community desperately needs more hotel rooms and short-stay accommodation.
2. The apartments will give people downsizing more options and contribute to the housing supply needs of the area and the nation.
3. The community needs more refined dining options which the proposed restaurants will provide.
4. The community will benefit from the amenities and shops that are included in this proposal.
5. The project will be visually appealing which will benefit the look of the area and even make the area iconic on the world stage.
6. The local streets can handle the increased traffic if a round-a-bout is built at the intersection of Morisset Park Rd and Fishery Point Rd. This is an easy fix.
7. This project will create ongoing employment opportunities for the local community.
8. This project will increase tourism to the area, boosting the local economy.

We are only against the reviewed height .
we would like to see the buildings to be only 2 stories high.
We need more residential for families in this area as well, not places that are going to be empty for the majority of the time.
Lets build a better community for everyone.
G+P.

As a resident of Trinity Point i am concerned of the alterations to several of the proposed buildings. It will affect us and the residents of Trinity Point and surrounds. The development plans have changed quite considerably since we invested in our home here at Trinity Point by size and height.

BUILDING HEIGHTS.
The developer has already applied for heights above the Local council requirements and had approval, it should not be granted for any additional height. I object due to the close proximity of local residential housing in the estate and our home. By raising the heights even more will obstructed of our view of the skyline, cast even more shadowing to nearby streets. Also the visual appeal of the building structure has been comprised with a significant reduction of planting. This could ultimately have a getto look as balconies get used for clothes drying and storage and are not screened by vegetation.
The developers drafting consultants would have been aware of the required heights for Basements, Lifts and heights required for each floor to include ducting and servicing. I believe it was never the developers intention to stick with the 8 storey limit heights that where approved.

PLANTS AND VEGETATION
What was making this development so special was the clever use of vegetation planters on all balconies to allow the buildings to blend in with the surrounding vegetation and local area making it unique and eco friendly. Now with the majority of planting no longer being proposed the buildings Eco friendly look with be lost and will be more like high rise residential rental style apartment living in a regional area and could potentially be an eyesore for thousands of people locally around the Morissset area.

SUMMARY
The developer and the drafting architects clearly knew that the original heights applied for where not high enough. They also knew that balcony vegetation would not be added the due to engineering and ongoing service costs.
If this development fails in delivering something unique and eco friendly it will be one of Lake Macquarie and NSW biggest eyesores.
The state government should consider this development carefully as the developer may not deliver what was originally proposed.

I object to the proposal base on the poor road access to the site and the increase of vehicles both during construction and when completed.Currently traffic is bottle necked on Fishery Point Rd at Bonnells Bay Public School to travel west onto Macquarie Rd/ Wangi Rd and beyond with no visible plan to upgrade access. The increase in vehicle movement will create traffic chaos from the M1 motorway through Morissett township then onto Fishery Point Rd, the existing traffic currently is at a crawl at times in Morissett Main Street and this proposal will only compound that problem.
Also to note there are also large developments currently under way at Morissett on Wyee Rd that already will worsen vehicle access and movement , these are Cedar Mill Entertainment Venue and a retirement precinct, Archers Run.
Morissett is a village not a major town or city, the arterial roads have not been widened or extended virtually since the 1960’s, continual home development has fed into these arteries especially in the past 25 years almost to saturation point.
A development of this proportion needs its own access plan .
Kind regards

I hope I'm on track. My major concern is with the increased traffic going by the public school. There is a t-intersection which at the moment is very difficult to motor through, especially during school times. The angle of the give way road (Fishery Point Road) is not 90 degrees making it hard to see traffic coming from the left. More so when children being picked up. Maybe the give way sign could be moved to Morisset Rd side. I'm not the only resident that has these concerns. That's the cheapest alternative, or a round-about or a set of lights. Just a thought.

Ref: SSD-27028161-Mod-1
I am objecting to the modification to the current application because of the extra load it will put on our current infrastructure. Development in the Morisset area of recent times has been exponential, yet there has been NO improvement to roads or traffic flow. Peak times from 7.30am through to 9.30 am and 2.30pm through to 5.30pm through the main street of Morisset is far from free flowing. The road system has not kept up with the residential growth in this area, let alone what will happen once the music bowl at the old golf course is completed. Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure should be doing what their name suggest - plan infrastructure! There has been NO planning or improvement of infrastructure in this area for several years. The road traffic systems needs to be improved prior to approval of any further development. I'm all for development, but please let us not put the cart before the horse. Please fix the roads and traffic flow first. It takes longer to get through the main street of Morisset out to the Motorway, than it does to travel the rest of the way to Kurri Kurri or Cessnock. Please take this as a serious objection, and consider those who live here and have to travel out of this area on these slow one-laned roads for their employment.

Kind regards
Caroline van Duinen

I believe this area is in need of more accomodation and quality restaurants and cafes not only for tourists and holiday makers but for the locals too. I think this project will help boost the local economy through tourism and bring new business owners out to this area.