Dane [Mullyang] Shanahan
Joadja
[email protected]
I allow my name to be stated publicly
__________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Formal Objection Submission to the Berrima Gaol Blue Sox Group Pty Ltd Berrima Hotel
Application Number
SSD-66876472
Assessment Type
State Significant Development
Development Type
Accommodation
Local Government Areas
Wingecarribee Shire
Exhibition Start-End Date
16/10/2025 - 26/11/2025

I Dane [Mullyang] Shanahan, declare that I have not made a political donation and the following objection submission is made with All Rights Reserved and Without Prejudice.
As a Ngambri man from the neighboring Nation, I write to lodge a formal objection to the proposed development of the former Berrima Correctional Centre, (Gaol) and to honor ancient International Treaty between our two Nations.
Cultural Heritage
Berrima Gaol and surrounds for the proposed site of 55 hotel apartments has been intergenerationally known to Gundungurra people as a burial place where our people were laid to rest. Between 2018 and 2020, when the site was an active women’s prison, the grounds continued to be a place of culturally significant ceremony and knowledge exchange led by Gundungurra knowledge holder Aunty Trish Levett [Kalawatawarra] and First Nations prisoners.
The proposed multi-storey hotel apartments would visually dominate the Wingecarribee [Woonjeegaribay] River and riparian zone. The vulnerable natural habitat is a profoundly significant and integral part of the Gurrangutch and Mirrangan creation story of the Southern Highlands, and a place where Gundungurra Law is held.
The proposed development requires extensive deep excavation that Gundungurra people know will disturb ancestral remains and other objects of profound spiritual significance.
Disturbing or excavating land knowing, or having reasonable cause to believe, that Aboriginal objects (including ancestral remains) are present is an offence under section 86 of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974, unless an Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit (AHIP) has first been granted under section 90.
Astonishingly, the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report (ACHAR) prepared by Austral Archaeology contains no subsurface testing inspection, the Blue Sox contractors concluded the area is “largely disturbed” with “no discernible tangible heritage values.”
Gundungurra Elders and knowledge holders can advise that the site and its immediate surroundings contain ancestral burials and other relics of profound cultural significance. No meaningful consultation with the relevant Gundungurra stakeholders, and no engagement with this intergenerational knowledge have taken place.
In the absence of proper due diligence and genuine consultation, any application for an AHIP that purports to authorise disturbance of this known burial ground would be fundamentally flawed and should be refused. To downplay or dismiss the known cultural significance of this place — in the face of clear Gundungurra oral history and lived experience — amounts to an infantilisation of Gundungurra people, our knowledge systems, and our continuing connection to this Country.
I must impose a more pressing issue, the absence of any evidence of a lawful exchange of title between the Gundungurra People and colonial authorities—nor any subsequent rectification through treaty, consent, or natural justice—the NSW Government and its Ministers have acted unconscionably by transferring a mere colour of title to Blue Sox Pty Ltd for the redevelopment of Berrima Gaol. This flawed chain of title, rooted in the arbitrary seizure of Gundungurra Country in the 19th century without procedural fairness, perpetuates the meta-legal defects critiqued in Colonial Land Title in Australia: A Meta-Legal Critical Inquiry (Lilienthal & Ahmad (2019) Commonwealth Law Bulletin 45(2): 1–26). As the article elucidates, drawing on the rare judicial acknowledgment in Mortimer v Auswide Services Ltd T/as Caloola Farm (In Liquidation) [2016] ACTSC 282, such colonial grants—imported via feudal doctrines like nulle terre sans seigneur—were nullities for failing to recognise First Nations allodial (absolute) title, rendering downstream alienations vulnerable to challenge on equitable grounds of unconscionability. The purpose of the Commonwealth Law Bulletin is to inform and educate legal professionals, government officials, and academics about legal developments and emerging issues throughout the Commonwealth. It serves as a forum for sharing information and fostering harmonized approaches to legal matters across jurisdictions that share a common law tradition.
The 2022 divestment to Blue Sox Pty Ltd, via a $7 million sale by Property and Development NSW, exemplifies this ongoing inequity: a State-owned asset, burdened by unextinguished Gundungurra prior rights, is repurposed for boutique hotel and entertainment uses without first addressing foundational title validity. Amid the current State Significant Development exhibition, this transfer demands scrutiny to prevent further dispossession.
Gundungurra Elders and knowledge holders must have self-determination and be empowered to lead an allodial title inquiry or judicial review, affirming our beneficial title. Anything less entrenches colonial genocide by inflicting on the group conditions in whole or in part, denying our living connection to Country.

Please see uploaded submission.

I am writing in support of the proposal to transform the Berrima Gaol into a hotel and entertainment precinct. The site is currently unused, and this redevelopment presents a valuable opportunity to revitalise it in a way that respects its heritage while delivering meaningful benefits to the community.

The project will help stimulate local business, create employment opportunities, attract more visitors, and provide a new space for residents and tourists to enjoy. It will breathe new life into an inactive site and turn it into an asset for the entire region.

I fully support this proposal and believe it represents a positive and progressive step for Berrima and the Southern Highlands.

I support the Berrima Gaol Adaptive reuse project.

The reasons I am apposed to the Berrima Hotel project :-
1. The proposed dwelling will have unacceptable impact on the Riparian area of the Wingecarribee River ( part of the Sydney catchment drinking water) with adverse consequences, eg toxic sediment , PFAS etc
2. The development proposed will become a noisy place and a bright light hub creating a huge impact on the natural habitants already there and interrupt the sonar movements of microbats dwelling there.
3. The proposal of a 195 car park on two stories and built on the sandstone there is unacceptable because Sandstone is is known for its porosity and crumbling nature, again likely to drain into the nearby River leading to Sydney Water catchment
WHY WAS BLUESOX GIVEN A WAIVER BY D.P.I.E . NOT REQUIRING THEM TO DO A DIVERSITY REPORT.

The impact of the construction of 60 new hotel rooms just above the River riparian mark would negatively impact the drainage risking pollution. It would have a destructive effect to the tranquillity of the river and the heritage history.

I find the project in opposition to the safeguard of the historic architectural and natural character of the environment adjacent the Old Gaol building. The environment between the bush to the west of the property and the historic building, the village and the river needs to stay as is. It constitutes a unique glimpse into our history which is so rare today. This offers an understanding of how society existed in the early days of the colony, something so rare.

Grounds for my objection are.
1. Over development of the site, in particular, guest villas outside the gaol walls and the multi level car park.
2. Lack of facilities for community use.
3. Lack of any significant museum space reflecting the history of the gaol
4. Development which is inconsistent with the heritage village.