Skip to main content

State Significant Development

Determination

West Culburra Mixed Use Subdivision

Shoalhaven City

Current Status: Determination

Interact with the stages for their names

  1. SEARs
  2. Prepare EIS
  3. Exhibition
  4. Collate Submissions
  5. Assessment
  6. Recommendation
  7. Determination

The Applicant has appealed the IPC's refusal of the development in the Land and Environment Court, and has been granted leave to rely upon amended plans. Submissions received on the amended plans may be viewed under the 'Submissions 2' folder below.

Attachments & Resources

Notice of Exhibition (1)

DGRs (1)

EA (66)

Submissions (17)

Agency Submissions (29)

Response to Submissions (21)

Additional Information (13)

Amendments (40)

Recommendation (1)

Determination (4)

Approved Documents

Other Documents (2)

Note: Only documents approved by the Department after November 2019 will be published above. Any documents approved before this time can be viewed on the Applicant's website.

Complaints

Want to lodge a compliance complaint about this project?

Make a Complaint

Enforcements

There are no enforcements for this project.

Inspections

20/10/2022

Note: Only enforcements and inspections undertaken by the Department from March 2020 will be shown above.

Submissions

Filters
Showing 41 - 60 of 336 submissions
Barrie Faulkner
Support
CULBURRA BEACH , New South Wales
Message
Please see attached.
Attachments
Nel Batten
Support
CULBURRA BEACH , New South Wales
Message
Please see attached.
Attachments
M Tout
Support
CULBURRA BEACH , New South Wales
Message
Please see attached.
Attachments
Tony Caua
Support
CULBURRA BEACH , New South Wales
Message
Please see attached.
Attachments
Brian Herring
Support
CULBURRA BEACH , New South Wales
Message
Please see attached.
Attachments
Susan Herring
Support
CULBURRA BEACH , New South Wales
Message
Please see attached.
Attachments
J McCrae
Support
CULBURRA BEACH , New South Wales
Message
Please see attached.
Attachments
James Forno
Comment
CULBURRA BEACH , New South Wales
Message
Overall I support the project in the revised concept. However, the current infrastructure in the area will need considerable upgrading. Canal Street and Redbank Lane will need foot paths. With the major increase in traffic along Brighton Parade in particular from the higher density area of the development, the road will require widening, curbing and foot paths. Brighton Parade will be the main access to Woolworths from the development.
With the holiday homes and short term rentals in the Brighton Pde that commonly have in excess 10 vehicles each parked on the side of the road, Brighton Parade virtually becomes a one lane street now, without the extra traffic. I am concerned that the children walk on the road now and without foot paths there will be a sad event.
There looks to be considerable area in the "odour zone" that could be used as a communal garden and utilise water from the storm water infrastucture.
Clive Wright-Smith
Object
Milperra , New South Wales
Message
This sub-mission mainly relates to my concerns that stormwater from the Project site will carry pollution into Curleys Bay. Point 4.5, “Water Cycle Assessment”, of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) discusses the need for measures to control run off from the Project site entering Curleys Bay. Given that Curleys Bay is effectively a backwater of the Crookhaven River, there is little tidal flow to disperse dissolved pollutants, let alone carry away any sediment. An outline of proposed control measures is given with a flow chart showing the units within the system; included are “Gross Pollutant Traps”, “Bioretention Basins”, “Flow Control”, “Stormwater Dispersal System” and “off line Stormwater Ponds”. These measures are further outlined Appendix 15 of the EIS. If properly implemented and maintained from early stages of construction, throughout construction and on into the future I feel that they would probably be effective. However, I have very serious concerns that this will not be the case.

During the initial phase of the project land will have to be cleared of vegetation and earth moved to construct roads and put in drainage systems. At this stage the only thing preventing storm water carrying sediment into Curleys Bay would likely be bails of straw, hardly enough if a major rain event were to develop, eg an East Coast Low.

During subsequent stages of construction, the drainage system would have to cope with high levels of sediment being carried down from ground exposed prior to buildings being erected and vegetation put back to protect areas not covered by buildings, concrete or bitumen. This situation would become much worse if there were delays in construction, due to economic down turns making finance difficult to obtain or if another pandemic were to develop. Drainage systems would become blocked, allowing over flow of sediment-laden water.

Once the project is completed the cost of maintaining the complex stormwater treatment system would fall on the Shoalhaven City Council. The stormwater treatment system is expected to meet the “Neutral or Beneficial Effect” (NorBE) standard (see page 52 of the EIS). This means that output from the treatment system is required to at least match the standard of run off entering Curleys Bay at present. To achieve this into the future continuous maintenance, as well as renewal of units of the treatment system will be required. This places a significant responsibility and burden on the Council. At present, there is ample observable evidence that the Council is struggling to maintain the infrastructure that it is currently responsible for. If neglected, the treatment system will surely fail, resulting in serious environmental damage to Curleys Bay and surrounding areas

With the above in mind, I do not think that the project should be approved. It is not worth the risk.

Clive Wright-Smith

A personal note:
I feel well placed to make the above submission. I have a BSc (Hons 1) in Applied Geology from UNSW. Also I regularly visited Orient Point / Culburra for 30 years while my Parents were alive. Since their passing, some 20 years ago and then my retirement 16 years ago, I have spent around a third of each year living at Orient Point
Paul Godsell
Object
CULBURRA BEACH , New South Wales
Message
I am opposed to the West Culburra Project Proposal for the following reasons
A. Adverse effect of water quality in the Crookhaven Estuary. Despite promises that water from the development will be adequately treated, there remains an unacceptable risk that run off from the development into the estuary will reduce water quality in the estuary and negatively affect the fish and other creatures living in the estuary and interfere with the inter-tidal vegetation and sea grasses in the area.
B. Unacceptable risk to oyster production on the Crookhaven Estuary. The project proposal presents a significant risk and immediate threat to the oyster leases and oyster production on the Crookhaven Estuary, which constitute a valuable local industry providing employment, financial benefits and tourism to the area.
C. Adverse effect on bird populations on the Estuary and in the native vegetation north of Culburra Road. Any pollution of the water and indeed increased activity on the estuary will push a range of water and migratory birds away from the area.
D. Loss of natural vegetation along Culburra Road. At a time when very large proportion of vegetation in the Shoalhaven area was burnt in the 2019-20 bushfires, this project will remove a large area of natural vegetation.
E. Loss of balance between development and protection of the environment. The project proposes a significant urban development over the next 20 years, largely at a cost to the natural environment including a loss of native vegetation, pressure on the habitat of water and migratory birds, pressure on the mangrove growth and represents an inappropriate balance between development and protection of the natural environment.
F. Damage to indigenous heritage in the area along the estuary. The project will interfere with sites of significance to the local indigenous community which is not acceptable.
G. The loss of these aspects of the area along Culburra Road and on the Crookhaven, removes or seriously limits any opportunity for future tourism in the area, to inspect the estuary, the full history of the area and the bird life which are valuable assetsto the local region.
Anne Dwyer
Support
CULBURRA BEACH , New South Wales
Message
My husband & I have owned property in Culburra Beach & travelled back & forth for the past 20 years. We retired permanently to our home here 9 years ago. We are
now approaching the stage where we would consider downsizing to a smaller home, if there were suitable, affordable, housing choices available.

Over the years I have witnessed a gradual decline in local retail shops with increasing vacancy rates & often hear discussion from people who say they can't sustain the business just on the Christmas holiday trade & the few long weekends during summer months. I would agree with that opinion & note that even the local Hardware Store, which had been operating in Culburra Beach as long as I have been coming here & longer, closed due to lack of trade in 2018.

I support the revised West Culburra Development proposal because I believe the town does need some form of appropriate expansion to provide economic stimulus & affordable, sustainable housing to meet the various needs of both young & old who would like to live in this area.

Over recent years I have attended public meetings held by the Independent Planning Commission & heard the arguments for & against this development. I am also aware that this development proposal has been revised several times by the developers over many years to address environmental concerns raised. I attended a more recent presentation of just what is intended in this development which, once again, has been reduced considerably in size & from my understanding has addressed the ongoing debate about water quality & any effect on the local waterways, Aboriginal cultural issues & the impact on the local environment. I also understand that the Halloran Trust has set aside 2,000 acres of land adjoining the local National Park area to compensate for the removal of trees in the proposed development site. I think that in itself is commendable & also note that they, the Halloran Trust, intends to disburse profits made back to the local community & others yet to be identified.

Culburra Beach is a beautiful area & does get busy during peak holiday season, like every other seaside town, in my experience. Without tourism during these times I'm afraid the local small business just don't make enough to see them through the full year. I've seen so many come & go over the years & many of the existing small business outlets in town are for sale. Few attract interest because over the recent Christmas holiday period some of the local cafe's did not even open for breakfast or lunch trade due to staffing costs I am told. If they can't do breakfast during January school holidays what hope have they got during Winter months?

I believe that this revised proposal should go ahead to provide some affordable, sustainable housing for the local area. This in turn will create jobs in the foreseeable future in the building industry & many others. I also believe that the development proposal has more than adequately addressed the environmental concerns & note that, unlike the current storm water outlets in the existing town area, there are NO direct storm water outlets into any water ways. Water is retained in catchment ponds, filtrated & reused on the proposed green spaces & sports oval. I don't know what more they could do to satisfy this requirement.

I know there are those who say why not fix the existing infrastructure in the town before creating new areas for development. That is a valid point & something the local Council should consider, but not relevant to this proposal as it stands. Culburra Beach needs new permanent residents to inject confidence into the local economy which might just attract people to invest in the empty shops that exist today & have done so for far too long.

Thank you for considering my submission
Narelle Wright
Object
CULBURRA BEACH , New South Wales
Message
Please see attached.
Attachments
Alan Wright
Object
CULBURRA BEACH , New South Wales
Message
Please see attached.
Attachments
Straesser Architects
Object
BIRCHGROVE , New South Wales
Message
Please see attached.
Attachments
Daylene Shepherd
Object
CULBURRA BEACH , New South Wales
Message
I object to the development because Culburra Beach is a lovely, quiet town that does not need more houses and shops!
Meron Wilson
Object
LEICHHARDT , New South Wales
Message
Does not comply with NSW Govt requirement for limited development adjacent to existing town. The character of existing housing stock is totally ignored. The dwelling lots are way smaller than the existing ones, creating a totally different character. There is no space for private outdoor living, a significant desirable feature of south coast lifestyle.
The proposal increases the population by nearly one third while adding nothing to the amenity of current residents. A bike path along the foreshore to a housing development does not do it. There is no mention of reserving a portion of the dwellings for essential service providers.
A 25 metre wide road is insufficient protection against wildfire for occupants in most of Lot 6. The sewage treatment plant forms a suitable APZ for the township and allowing the construction into the bushland beyond of a tight packed housing enclave, with one entry and exit road leading onto the existing single entry and exit road for the township, is irresponsible.
The threat of damage or destruction of the existing fishing and oyster industries due to pollution and erosion runoff is very real. It will be difficult to ensure that water quality is not compromised during construction or afterwards by failures in the proposed system. Once contaminated, water takes time and a lot of resources to repair.
Victoria Anderson
Object
CULBURRA BEACH , New South Wales
Message
I believe that the proposed plan will not benefit the township of Culburra Beach. I think that there has not been enough planning & environmental insight to create a viable development. I see no benefit to the current township & infrastructure. A 4 storey unit complex at the beginning of the township will not assist in keeping our small coastal village vision. Environmental impacts will be much greater & detrimental to the wide variety of Self Employed persons who make a living from our pristine waterways. Current Roads, Shops & Transport cannot withstand the demand at present, let alone with these extra dwellings proposed. I will never be able to afford to purchase a property in a town which I have lived in or close to for 30 years. This is not what the wider Culburra Beach community want & our voices are being silenced for the 'big spenders'.
Trevor Smith
Object
Culburra Beach , New South Wales
Message
The proposal of the West Culburra will not solve the perceived problems its supporters claim. It is a commercial venture by the Hallorhan trust and its associated companies Sealark Pty Ltd and Reality Realisation. There is nothing Philanthropic about this proposal. It is designed for profit only and supported by these whom will gain from this such as Real Estate Businesses that host and chair meetings regarding this proposal and whom allow participation only for supporters. There has not been a clear and concise summary of why this proposal should go ahead. The owners of the businesses in support of this proposal are often not residents of this town, and hence it can only be assumed that their support is purely for financial reasons. The Progress society state 'it is a positive step to inject confidence into the community and support our ailing CBD"( Bugle Feb-march 2021). Again the Progress Society gives no acknowledgement or support to sectors of the community that may have differing views. It again demonstrates how out of touch the Progress Society is with the community and their inability to think beyond tired out antiquated views of community that belong in the thinking of last century. Develop for development sake may have been appropriate in the 1970's.
The perceived problem of the CBD is not unique to Culburra and is nationwide in all rural and regional communities. As the population becomes more mobile then the pull of the larger urban based businesses out perform the smaller local business. On line shopping also decreases the demand on local business. Placing another 274 houses with say, 700 more people, will not solve that. Businesses in Culburra have failed from poor business models, a lack of adaptability and in some sectors over supply ( 4 Real Estate Agents and 2 Veterinarians). Business need to adapt and that has not occurred on the whole. It is clear that there is a struggle during the quieter, winter months ( though this may change with the COVID related increase in local tourism). So instead of just hoping 700 more people will use the businesses there needs to be investment in ideas and concepts that increase the utilisation of services during this month. Apart from the Health Caring Sector the Tourist sector is clearly the next biggest employer. For example, Jindabyne and several East Coast Tasmanian towns, have revitalised their towns through adventure and ecotourism, in these cases through mountain biking. This enables Jindabyne businesses to remain viable during the Non -snow season.
Culburra needs to work on ways of maintaining its tourist industry in ways other than utilisation of the beach.

If I was to dream and the Hallorhan trust donated the land West of Culburra and around the lake to become, say, a national park then Moutain biking, Bushwalking, Bird watching , Aboriginal Cultural awareness, Aquatic trips such as whale, dolphin watching, Kayaking and fishing charters could develop. These are now thriving growing business in this country with a sustainability across all seasons. Diversify away from the beach. This is where jobs are to be found.

The Concept plan wishes to place 700 people in areas where there are no Jobs,no public transport and limited other services. Housing alone will not attract business growth. Mixed housing is so vitally important but needs to be in areas that have services nearby. Medical services will not cope with the increase population demand as we can hardly cope at the moment. It is not true that population will simply attract staff. Medical service across rural areas all struggle to find and retain staff.
The proposed industrial zones are not needed as there is currently one vacant unit at the industrial state and there is plans underway for further units on another industrial complex. We do not need more playing fields as we have adequate facilities at Crookhaven with recently upgraded facilities.

In summary, therefore, this plan does nothing to address issues that are facing Culburra ( and most rural towns) and will only increase the pressure on services that struggle to cope currently. It is purely a commercial proposal that will benefit only a few who are, on the whole, not part of this community,
Name Withheld
Support
ORIENT POINT , New South Wales
Message
I have lived in Culburra Beach since I was 12 years old.
I have a local Business in Culburra Beach.
I believe this development will be good for the area it needs progress not too much has happened over the years.
We have children and they will benefit from this project.
It also will be good to bring more local work to Culburra Beach for myself and all the other businesses in the area.
I support the West Culburra Beach project to go ahead.
Kayleigh Sleath
Object
CULBURRA BEACH , New South Wales
Message
As a local who grew up in the town, I object strongly to an overdevelopment of Culburra Beach which threatens our wetlands and bulldozes our forest, yet will not realistically provide any economic benefits to the town. Culburra already has 78% too much retail space based on regional, sustainable norms according to the developer's own application - which then goes on to ludicrously suggest a development which would increase this to 93%. The excess retail space created by this development will threaten existing local businesses with more competition than there is demand (the developer's economic assessment has already overestimated the small residential increase provided by the development by assuming that only 1-2% of homes will become holiday homes), setting our retail precinct up for failure.
Should development be needed in Culburra (although according to the developer's application the average annual growth population of Culburra is 0.7%, not far behind that of the Shoalhaven region as a whole despite large housing development expansion in areas of Nowra, Vincentia and Ulladulla - demonstrating that Culburra Beach will not "die" without development), the developers should be re-developing our current shopping precinct and turning the excess space into high quality medium density housing for downsizers - NOT bulldozing our native forests for an unnecessary development built on shaky economic foundations which will have negative ramifications for our retail precinct in the future. Any development should also be based on sustainable architecture, aiming to have a net zero carbon footprint and using modern technology to work toward environmental sustainability (an issue which should be forefront in Culburra's mind - as we are a tourist town, and rely on tourism to our beautiful natural areas to survive economically, the financial effects of climate change will significantly impact us). A development which focused on futuristic sustainable technologies to be carbon net zero could be marketed and would enhance Culburra's standing as a tourist destination, demonstrating it as a thriving and relevant area in tune with the times - in comparison, this destruction of native forest in an attempt to create excess retail space only caters to the misplaced idea that the town is "dying", and does not provide any incentive to bring new residents to the area or a new drawcard for tourism. A development which does not at least attempt to incorporate sustainable technologies is clearly not concerned with the welfare of the community and not beneficial in the long-term, and disregarding the marketing potential behind the implementation of sustainable architecture and technology is missing an opportunity to provide a new lease of life to the town and mark it as an area with a clear place in the future.
If land is necessary for housing developments, there is already plenty of pre-cleared land in the Shoalhaven; there is no excuse to be clearing native forest and threatening native species for any development, particularly not for one which will not even provide economic benefits to the community.
This development proposal is outdated and unnecessary, based on misleading economic analysis and biased slogans, and will have negative economic and environmental consequences, even when analysed from the developer's own application. Culburra Beach deserves better. I strongly object to this project.

Pagination

Project Details

Application Number
SSD-3846
Assessment Type
State Significant Development
Development Type
Residential & Commercial
Local Government Areas
Shoalhaven City
Decision
Approved
Determination Date
Decider
LEC

Contact Planner

Name
Patrick Copas