Friends of Oatley Inc - No Coles Supermarket for Oatley

Visit Our New website at WWW.FRIENDSOFOATLEY.COM

2008-09-04T22:47:00.003+10:00

Please click [this link] to access the NEW website.

Unsafe Traffic Situation - Truck on Wrong Side of the road

2008-05-18T18:30:00.004+10:00

Unedited letter sent to St George Sutherland Shire Leader , part of which was published Thursday May 15 2008.

Dear Editor,
Please find attached a photo of a truck on the wrong side of Mulga Rd, Oatley. This "unsafe traffic situation" occurs on a daily basis. And why? Because Hurstville Council told the Land and Environment Court that such turning paths of trucks was not an issue.

Trucks, when turning left out of the Coles loading dock, cross the double centreline and go onto the wrong side of the road. This is not only illegal but also unsafe.

The court appointed expert identified such turning paths of trucks as an issue for the Land and Environment Court to consider.

On the first day of the hearing Hurstville Council told the court about "this problem of getting these 11 metre trucks on and off the site."

The commissioner agreed with Hurstville Council and the court appointed expert, and said that he could not ignore the problem and that if he followed Coles’ line of argument and if he decided to approve the supermarket, Coles "will have an unsafe traffic situation."

But, on the last day of the hearing Hurstville Council told the court that the turning paths of trucks was no longer an issue for Council, and the commissioner of the court then went on to approve the supermarket.

Regards
Anne Wagstaff

Breach of court orders at Coles Oatley - again

2007-10-26T09:26:00.000+10:00

Letter sent to Hurstville City Council ,

I would like to report and have recorded the fact (ie in the form of a work order) that just before 8am this morning I observed a Tip Top truck (see attached photo) parked in Mulga Rd on the western side of the Mulga Rd/Woronora Pde intersection, apparently waiting to enter the loading dock. The door of the loading dock was closed. I told the driver that parking in any of Oatley West's residential streets is a breach of Land and Environment Court orders and asked him to wait in Roberts' Ave, Mortdale. The driver drove off. I watched the driver proceed north along Woronora Pde, go around the roundabout at the Woronora Pde/Wonoona West intersection and head back towards Coles Oatley - to then park in Woronora Pde (see attached photo). I stopped and repeated my claim that parking in our residential streets is a breach of court orders and that he should wait in Roberts Ave, Mortdale. The driver then asked where Roberts Ave was, which I naturally told him.

Thank you in anticipation of Council's consideration of this request. I would appreciate an early reply to my correspondence.

Regards
Anne Wagstaff

Contravention of Coles Traffic Management Plan.

2007-10-25T13:19:00.000+10:00

Letter to Hurstville City Council, General Manager September 28, 2007

Contravention of Coles Traffic Management Plan.

I am writing to complain about a contravention in the traffic management plan court order decreed when the Coles Supermarket was approved by the Land and Environment Court.

On Thursday 27 September at approximately 8.20am a Steggles van (number plate XBA506) delivering to Coles drove down Mi Mi St. The loading dock at Coles was full, so the van then proceeded to circle the block of Woronora Pde, Woonona Pde, Mi Mi St and Mulga Rd. The truck finally pulled into the loading dock at approximately 8.33am.

My understanding of the court order is:

That trucks are supposed to access the site via Gungah Bay Road and Mulga Road, and

That trucks are supposed to wait at Roberts Ave near the tennis courts for the loading dock to become available, not circle the streets in Oatley.

Please advise what actions council is taking to ensure that the Court Order is not breached by Coles.

Sincerely

Kym Coleman

Cc: Coles Supermarkets Pty Ltd (ABN 45 004 189 708)

800 Toorak Rd, Tooronga,

Vic 3146

Coles Supermarkets Pty Ltd

Manager

47-65 Mulga Rd

Oatley, 2223.

How many supermarkets do we need?

2007-09-20T14:53:00.000+10:00

Have Your Say on Traffic Problems at Coles Mulga Road

2007-09-11T13:19:00.000+10:00

1) Have you seen trucks reversing out of loading bay?
This a breach of the court order. Take photo or details of numberplate, report immediatly to police and council this is a breach of the court order and report it to this blog with date and time.

2) Do you see trucks parked near Coles waiting to go into dock?
This is against the court order. According to the court order, trucks have to wait on Roberts Avenue. Report to Council and Police.

3) Have you experienced a dangerous situation as a pedestrian or driver due to traffic coming out of into the development?

Send us photos or your stories to ORAO@oatleypark.com

Coles doesn't support locals

2007-08-22T14:55:00.000+10:00

Leader 21 August 2007

No support for Coles

2007-08-22T14:46:00.000+10:00

Leader 16 August 2007

Don't shop there if you care

2007-08-21T11:15:00.000+10:00

We tried, we lost but we still care

The people of Oatley fought hard to protect our suburb from what we felt was a development that would have a detrimental impact on this special part of Sydney. Though we lost in the end, it wasn’t without a huge amount of dedication, time and effort put in by the community.

Has all that effort been for nothing? THAT'S UP TO YOU

Although we’re yet to feel the full impact of this development and there’s nothing we can do now about the ugly edifice in Mulga Road, it’s time to think about why we felt a Coles Supermarket was wrong for Oatley in the first place. Just because it’s there doesn’t make it right. There’ll be lots of communities into the future who will be forced to give up quiet, leafy parts of their suburbs to corporates like Coles if those corporates can prove that fighting communities results in a profitable supermarket.

If you felt that what Coles did was wrong, you don’t have to support them. Coles needs the spending of every household in Oatley. Don’t think your household spend is too little to make a difference. When people join together and not support what they believe is wrong the result can be substantial even if the Oatley battle, as such, is lost.

Organisations like Coles will not consider communities unless it is in their interests to do so. We can show Coles the importance of listening to communities and use our experience to help others.

You are still able to be a conscientious objector ….
If you didn’t want it, you have the right not to shop there.

Thanks for your long fight.

Oatley Residents Against Overdevelopment www.nocoles.oatleypark.com

Po Box 121, Oatley 2223

The First of accidents to come?

2007-07-27T13:21:00.000+10:00

A traffic accident occurred on 26 July 2007 at roadworks associated with the Coles site in Mulga Rd. Fortunately the driver was not badly injured and no other vehicles or persons were involved.

This accident confirms at least the careless disregard that the builders appear to have for traffic and pedestrian safety in the area, and is a further pointer to the unsafe traffic situation that the Coles supermarket development will cause.

Will Coles reassess the value of this site, please? Or will it take a death before Coles withdraws its totally unsuitable supermarket development?

Join Other Community Protests

2007-01-10T23:06:00.000+11:00

‘DAY OF RECKONING –CHANGE NSW PLANNING POLICIES,
OR CHANGE THE NSW GOVERNMENT - Join ORAO members on the march

wear your NO Coles in Oatley T shirt
Bring your banner

Sunday, February 11, 2007 (11am to 12.30 pm)

Hyde Park near Archibald Fountain, to then march on Parliament House.

All community action groups and supporters that want their voice heard are invited
This will be family-friendly rally with key speakers; Health and Planning Specialists, Politicians who are listening to the community and many others.Thousands of people are expected to attend this rally, and with this number of people will come the media coverage linked into the lead-up to the March State election. Your concerns will then become an issue that must be directly addressed by Minister Frank Sartor and the NSW State Government.

What is you local Member doing for you – ????????????

Land & Environment Court Dec 2006

2006-12-22T14:00:00.000+11:00

Developer has its way again!!! click above to see judgment

Hearing Continues on Friday 22 December

2006-12-20T20:34:00.000+11:00

About 40 attended on-site hearing on Wednesday 20th. Some submissions by local residents were heard. Court continued at Land & Environment Court from 12 noon to 4 pm.

Hearing continues at the
Land and Environment Court, Macquarie Street in the city from
12 noon on 22 December.

Please attend if you can. Merry Christmas !

2006-12-17T10:00:00.000+11:00

No Coles Oatley - The fight Continues

Onsite Court Hearing
9.30 am Wednesday 20 December 2006

Come to hear and witness the objections to the proposed modifications

Wear your No Coles in Oatley T-shirt

The Court case will continue on with the hearing in the Land & Environment Court (same day). Please consider making some time to demonstrate how our community are STILL AGAINST this overdevelopment.

Click here to view ORAO's objections to the modifications (pdf file)

ORAO - Oatley Residents Against Overdevelopment Inc.

Supreme Court Decision

2006-09-08T13:35:00.000+10:00

Hurstville City Council appeal at the NSW Court of Appeal
WE LOST !
Click here to read judgment

But the fight goes on

Boycott Coles and related business - Click here to see list

Letters September 2006

2006-09-04T15:01:00.000+10:00

Hurstville Council needs to enforce and get its priorities right
Sans Souci resident F. Jolly wonders "where are the officers charged with enforcing" a prohibited activity. (Your View, August 31)

Construction truck drivers continue to park illegally in the bus stop outside the Coles' site office, and in the no parking zone outside the dentist on Mulga Rd.

Oatley residents wonder who are the officers charged with enforcing these prohibited activities. Hurstville Council officers? Or police officers? And where are they? A robust presence of enforcers is needed to give confidence to our community that we will be protected.

Anna Bay resident Amanda Sutherland wrote, "Councils need to get their priorities right." (Your View, August 31)

Delivery trucks for Oatley West Liquor Shop are forced to double park on Mulga Rd or on the footpath because cars are currently utilising the parking spaces outside the shop all day.

Concerned about the danger to drivers and pedestrians, the Oatley West Liquor Shop's manager formally requested Hurstville Council to introduce time-restricted parking. However, following verbal responses from other nearby businesses that time-restricted parking "would adversely affect their businesses" (Minutes of council meeting, 23 August 2006 - MULGA ROAD, OATLEY - REQUEST FOR CHANGES TO PARKING RESTRICTIONS), Hurstville Council denied the Liquor Shop Manager's request.

Valid road traffic and pedestrian safety concerns ignored in favour of businesses' concerns about their bottom line?

Hurstville Council needs to gets its priorities right.

Regards

Anne Wagstaff
September 04, 2006

Groceryfacqs Articles

2006-08-18T18:36:00.000+10:00

26 July 2006 - Proposed new Coles supermarket hits potholes
Newcastle residents are up in arms against a 3000 sq metre supermarket and liquor store.

MAINTAIN THE RAGE

2006-07-27T13:59:00.000+10:00

OATLEY RESIDENTS ARE MAINTAINING THE RAGE
Buliding continues at a hectic pace as the date of the Supreme Court hearing on 15 August approaches. Check links below to see how other communities also fighting OVERDEVELOPMENT:
Newcastle Group - fighting Coles
Putney Progress Association (NSW)
Maleney (Queensland)
Rozelle (Sydney) are also fighting OVERDEVELOPMENT.
Bundeena

HCC Electronic Business Papers

2006-07-06T15:34:00.000+10:00

Click here for HCC Electornic Business Papers

Minutes of Council meetings
Service Delivery Meetings
Development Assesment Committee

Hurstville Council’s Ploy to Divide and Conquer?

2006-06-26T13:48:00.000+10:00

It appears that our Council is trying to divide our community, which to date, has been strong in fighting developments that are inappropriate. Council’s current proposal to shift the Peakhurst Ward boundary will directly affect Oatley West residents.

At present, all Oatley West residents are in the Peakhurst Ward. With the changes however, those residents in the area bounded by Mulga Rd, Gungah Bay Rd, Boundary Rd and River Rd will be moved to the Penshurst Ward.

Regardless of which side of Mulga Rd you live, this change will weaken Oatley West residents’ ability to effectively lobby council on development issues, thereby fragmenting our community’s people power (with future plans in Mulga Rd believed to be 3-storey developments) .
Will Peakhurst Ward Councillors speak up for Penshurst Ward? And vice versa?

Object to the proposal by writing to: The General Manager,
Hurstville City Council,
PO Box 205, Hurstville BC 1481.

Submissions need to be received by Friday, 30 June.

ORAO Objectives

2006-06-25T18:29:00.000+10:00

A group of residents in Oatley have felt it necessary to take the step to becoming an incorporated body due to our concerns about the over-development taking place in Oatley West especially the shopping strip along Mulga Road.

Objectives: The objective of ORAO is to provide a forum for evaluative discussion of developments in order to preserve and enhance the character and general well-being of the social and environmental milieu of Oatley.

Activities: Discussion, considered and focused thought, political lobbying and earnest endeavour, function as a lobby group; a voice for residents. Take actions in accordance with objectives.

Oatley Residents Against Overdevelopment Incorporated
P.O. Box 121
Oatley 2223

Membership Form

2006-06-25T16:24:00.000+10:00

Membership Application Form
Oatley Residents Against Overdevelopment Inc.
(incorporated under the Associations Incorporation Act 1984: No. INC9885623 on 22 May, 2006)

I / We, ......................................................................... ……………………………………………………
(full name of applicant 1) (full name of applicant 2)

Of .........................................................................................................................................................
(address)

Telephone: .................................... Mobile .................................
Email ..............................…………………………………………………………………….

Occupation / Skills …………………………………….………… …………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………….
(applicant 1) (applicant 2)

hereby apply to become a member / members of the above named incorporated association. In the event of my / our admission as a member / members, I / we agree to be bound by the rules of the association.

....................................................................... …..................................................................
Signature Applicant 1 Signature Applicant 2

Would you like to help the Association YES / NO
How can you help? (eg letter box drops, professional skills etc)

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

APPLICATION NOMINATION:

I, .................................................................................................. a current member of ORAO,
(name)
nominate the applicant/s, who is/are personally known to me, for membership of the Association.

............................................................................... ....................................................
Signature Date

Membership Fee of $10 for individuals and $15 for families (2 applicants). Applicants must be nominated by a current member of ORAO.

Send your application to: Oatley Residents Against Overdevelopment (Inc)
PO Box 121, Oatley 2223. All Cheques should be made payable to Oatley Residents Against Overdevelopment (Inc).

Direct Complaints to Private Certifier

2006-05-05T16:16:00.000+10:00

All complaints or concerns about non-compliance should be directed to the
Private Certifier Barry Johnson 9893 7773 or 0412 298 809.

Click on letter from Hurstville City Council for more information.................>>>>>>

Date of Appeal

2006-05-05T16:00:00.000+10:00

The date of appeal has been set
for Tuesday 15 August 2006

Click on letter for larger image of
letter from Hurstville City Council....................................................................>>>>>>>

Leader letters April

2006-04-20T18:20:00.000+10:00

Residents suffering due to Coles development

2006-03-22T12:58:00.000+11:00

Within hours of Mulga Road developers contacting council, No Stopping signs were placed opposite the Coles supermarket construction site.
See story in Leader 9 March 2006 (Click on photo for enlargement)

Coles Mulga Road truck danger – Leader,March 2006
The newly erected signs regarding parking at the front of the proposed Coles site in Mulga Rd were installed without first notifying the local residents.

While I can understand the need to have a Work Zone directly in front of the site, the erection of the No Stopping sign on the other side of the road was a bit perplexing so I queried it with Hurstville council.

Their response was that the approval of the signage was rushed through at the request of Hurstville Police, because the trucks turning on Mulga Rd into the site were a dangerous traffic hazard.

Why didn’t Hurstville City Council, The Land and Environment Court, the developer or Coles, foresee this as a problem?

Are these the same experts who do not foresee a problem with Coles delivery trucks? The thousands of local residents who have signed petitions against this gross overdevelopment sure did.

C. Budge

Renaldo to the rescue
Next time I want an issue of road safety at Oatley West School addressed I am going to get Coles developer, Renaldo Gaiety, to ring his mates at Hurstville Council.

His problem was his own traffic management plan. It failed to work so council sent out a team which specified the need, designed a "solution", consulted its traffic committee and erected new signs stopping the residents from parking in front of their houses (but did not bother informing them of the fact) all within two hours.

I, on the other hand, emailed Hurstville City Council on Wednesday (having been instructed to do so by police) and requested they address a safety issue at the school only to be told that they would try to get there sometime next week but could not make any promises about when.

In council’s eyes the needs and safety of our children comes well after the needs of the Coles developer.

Can council be serious about their appeal to the Supreme Court next Monday?

Communities in England are also fighting giants

2006-03-22T11:58:00.000+11:00

Our roving reporter David Koffel has just returned from England with this news.
He has written to the Leader highlighting that the Coles issue is not a local issue. Over 200 communities in England are campaigning against the giant supermarket chains Tesco and Sainsburys .

David's letter to the leader:
(not published yet)
Congratulations to The Leader on its objective coverage of the Oatley rally and streetwalk against Coles, (‘We don’t want to be fed this: residents’. 7 March, 2006).
The people of Oatley are not alone in their struggle to keep their neighbouring shops local.
On a recent brief trip to Britain I was interested to discover that in that country there are over 200 local community groups campaigning against giant supermarket chains (Tesco and Sainsburys).

These local community groups have the same concerns as we in Oatley have: that these supermarkets damage our neighbourhoods and destroy the sense of communal loyalty of small villages and small shopping streets such as Mulga Road.

One British community successfully lobbied to drive away Starbucks. The battle can be won.
Declining patronage of McDonalds has led to that company closing 25 of its British ‘restaurants’ as locals took their custom elsewhere. McDonalds’ European president admitted that his company is facing something of a consumer backlash.

Similar local sentiment is strong in Italy and France.

It is only natural for people to keep the ‘local’ in their local community.
David Koffel
Oatley West

Independent 3 March 2006 "How we can stand up to the retail giants"
Click to see larger image

Leader Letters March

2006-03-09T18:11:00.000+11:00

Big Day Out - angry residents show their dissatisfaction

2006-03-09T10:40:00.000+11:00

Oatley Big Day Out was well attended. About 400 people turned up at Boongara Reserve to show their dissatisfation at the continued work on the Coles site on Mulga Road.

Leader 7 March 2006(click on photo)..>>

Speeches were made by:
Daryl Melham - Federal Member: Kevin Green -State Member Mark Coure - Kograh Council

Thanks to: IGA Oatley, Clock Butcher, Oatley Lions and Roong Smithsumpan

For providing us with refreshments

"Coles representative" getting a trolley ride

BIG Day Out - March 4

2006-02-25T17:34:00.000+11:00

Oatley BIG Day Out - Street walk and BBQ

2006-02-25T17:16:00.000+11:00

Saturday, March 4th
12 noon until 3pm
Boongarra Reserve
Across from Oatley Station – Cnr. Mulga and River Roads.

Sausages and Drinks available
Tee Shirts on Sale. Bring your Banners.

WALK AGAINST COLES

The Coles Fight is Far from over!
Don’t let them fool you;
show your community support.

Hurstville City Council goes to the Supreme Court on Monday, 13th March – continuing the battle on Overdevelopment in Mulga Road.

Guest speakers.
Coles have been invited to say a few words.

Oatley Residents Against Overdevelopment

Community keeps fighting

2006-02-09T14:51:00.000+11:00

Spend developers’ gifts (Leader: 7 February 2006)

I was relieved to read that Hurstville Council still has $5.3 million in reserve in Section 94 contributions from developers who pay for local infrastructure improvements (“$577m left to fill up the council’s coffers”, Leader, January 10). Included in that amount should be the $71,557.52 that Renaldo Gaiety kindly contributed when he lodged his development application for the Coles supermarket in Oatley. According to council documents, $39,224 of Mr Gaiety’s Section 94 contributions is to be spent on open space and community recreation, and $20,388.00 on community services and facilities. In the past councils had to spend the Section 94 contributions in the area of the development. However, after legislation passed by the State Government last year, councils can now use their discretion in how these contributions are distributed. Will our community benefit from Mr Gaiety’s gift?
Anne Wagstaff
Oatley

Community fighter (Leader: 7 February 2006)

Mr Kasper’s letter “A hole lot of confusion” (Leader, February 2) is adding to the misinformation about the Mulga Road development. He has been informed that Hurstville Council has worked hard consistently to protect the community interest in this case and is still continuing this fight.
The council’s decision to appeal the case to the Supreme Court does not mean that we can force the applicant to stop work on the site until the appeal is heard.
The developer has a legal consent, which it received from the bind and Environment Court last November, and provided it complies with the court’s conditions, it can undertake site preparation.
The issuing of a construction certificate by a private certifier allowed the start of excavation works on the site before last Christmas.
The council is still committed to opposing this development and has taken the necessary steps to fight on the community’s behalf.
Cr Vlnce Badalati
Mayor
Hurstvllle Council

Council man missed the salient point (Leader 24 January 2006)

Hurstville Council’s general manager (Leader, December23) in respect to the Mulga Road supermarket, states that the application for the supermarket was subject to assessment by the council on December2004, in accordance with the controls that were operative ;li the time the applicat ion was lodged and could not be assessed retrospectively by an
amendment that was subsequent to the application.
The general manager stated that there was not sufficient timr , as at December 2004, to amend the council’s Local Lnvironment Plan (LEP) to include its previously intended objectives for small neighbourhood centres.
But he misses the salient point— there was ample time for the minister to approve an amendment to the LEP before the court hearing of March 2005. This allowed a further three months after the council refused the application in Decembcr 2004 and a total of eight months from when the residents first asked that this be done. If an amendment had been
approved by the minister or evidence produced to the court that its approval was imminent or certain, the court would almost certainly have upheld the council’s refusal.
The general manager appears to have been misinformed that an appllication can only be assessed on the controls that were operative at the time of the application. This view is contrary to the principle that retrospective and draft amendments are required to be considered under Clause 79c of the LP&A Act.
The council’s solicitors are appealing to the Supreme Court in the hope that, if successful, they will be able to retrospectively submit the now- approved amendment as evidence in the Land and Environment Court.
Ted Cooper
Oatley Residents Association

November / December Action

2005-12-12T13:38:00.000+11:00

Trolly Trouble - NRMA REPORT 11 December 2005

Fight to stop Coles in Stirling South Australia

Action on site

Shopping trip to Coles

Council to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal

Over 500 attend public meeting

Trolley Trouble

2005-12-11T13:28:00.000+11:00

Escaping the runaway trolley

11 November 2003
Australia’s leading motoring insurer, NRMA Insurance, today released results from the world’s first shopping trolley crash test, revealing damage to cars alone costs the community $1 million every year.

Consumer frustration is on the rise with shopping trolleys ramming, hitting, scratching, denting and bumping cars on a daily basis in carparks and on the street. NRMA Insurance research shows the average cost of repair is around $800 with more than 1,000 significant damage incidents occurring each year.

Rick Jackson, Group Executive of Personal Insurance, NRMA Insurance said, “The cost of repairs and having to get around without a car for a few days while it gets fixed creates such an inconvenience for consumers.

“The danger of discarded and abandoned trolleys, carelessly left in parking spots or resting against poles, is not confined to carparks. More and more we are hearing reports of motorists hitting shopping trolleys that were dumped on the side of the road or in home unit car parks. There are many incidents recorded where a driver has swerved to avoid a trolley and has hit another object instead.”

With Christmas just around the corner where shoppers are out en masse, carparks are full and shopping trolleys are loaded with food and gifts, NRMA Insurance is warning consumers to be extra careful and vigilant about returning trolleys to their bay.

“As we approach the festive season, it is not uncommon for shopping trolleys to be filled to the brim. The extra weight contributes to the potential damage caused by a ‘runaway’ trolley. Heavy trolleys are also more difficult to control, particularly given that many trolleys appear to have a mind of their own when it comes to maneuvering.

“If trolleys are left unattended or perhaps get in the hands of a child, the speed of the trolley can get up to around 10 km per hour after travelling just a few metres. This kind of impact can create some real damage,” added Mr Jackson.

Although the number of shopping trolley incidents reported each year is in excess of 1,000, NRMA Insurance believes car damage caused by shopping trolleys affects many more people across the country.

“We believe the issue is much bigger than the numbers show. Many motorists simply don’t lodge a shopping trolley insurance claim because they will have to pay an excess and they fear they’ll lose part of their no claim discount even though it was not their fault.

“NRMA Insurance has recently addressed this concern by offering no claim discount level protection for our Motor Insurance customers, enabling them to keep their no claim discount when they are not at fault,” said Mr Jackson.

NRMA Insurance is also concerned about the environmental impact of trolleys being dumped in rivers and lakes, polluting waterways and clogging streams.

So what next?
In its research, NRMA Insurance considered what steps can be taken to mitigate the risk of shopping trolley-related incidents. Some ideas and recommendations include:

* Although it is the shoppers’ responsibility to return the trolleys to their rightful place, if this is not being done, then other options need to be explored by shopping centre managers and supermarkets. For example, monetary incentives to help make sure trolleys are returned by using a $2 deposit system. NRMA Insurance sees some merit in this. Initially, it may help change consumer behaviour by getting shoppers into the habit of putting trolleys back in their bays.
* There needs to be greater vigilance in the collection of shopping trolleys.
* Supermarkets and major retail chains are encouraged to look at replacing hard metal trolleys with trolleys that are more car friendly, such as made out of plastic or feature padding. NRMA Insurance is currently working with one manufacturer to create such a trolley.
* Supermarkets and major retail chains need to investigate systems that prevent people from being able to take trolleys out of carparks. This can be achieved through an alarm being activated to embarrass offenders or electronic devices that will automatically lock the wheels on any trolley that passes a certain point.
* Other possibilities include wheels with an ‘inbuilt speed limiting’ mechanism to prevent trolleys from getting out of control. NRMA Insurance’s Research Centre has found that the gradient in many shopping centre carparks and driveways enables unattended trolleys to quickly reach speeds of 10 to 16 km/hr.

The facts

* It is estimated by NRMA Insurance that shopping trolley-related incidents cost the community $1 million nationally per year.
* 73 per cent of shopping trolley-related claims are for damage caused by ‘runaway’ or out of control trolleys.
* 19 per cent of shopping trolley-related claims are for damage caused by cars hitting unreturned trolleys in carparks or colliding with other objects while avoiding the trolley.
* 8 per cent of shopping trolley-related claims are for damage caused by cars hitting abandoned trolleys in the street.
* Through its Motor Insurance product NRMA Insurance offers no claim discount level protection, enabling customers to keep their no claim discount when they are not at fault.

Fight to stop Coles in Stirling South Australia

2005-12-07T14:05:00.000+11:00

Courier 7 December 2005

A decision to approve the Coles supermarket complex proposed
for Stirling is expected to be made tonight, (Wednesday).
This follows a meeting last week, when more than 300 people
packed into the Stirling RSL Hall and overflowed into the car park.
After hearing submissions from about 15 members of the public,
the Adelaide Hills Council’s Development Assessment Panel (DAP)
adjourned the meeting.
The supermarket and three specialty shops with a total area of
2950sqm has been recommended for approval by the council’s
planning staff.
But there has been strong opposition from the community,
including a 5000-signature petition, a public meeting and a march
through Stirling.
The Stirling Residents’ Association addressed the DAP on behalf of
144 people.

Site Action

2005-12-03T12:13:00.000+11:00

Public being denied acess to footpath. Going... Going.... Gone

Councillor Mark Coure Speech at Public Meeting

2005-11-29T10:11:00.000+11:00

Thank you so much for attending again today at Oatley West.
Thank you to all the organisers for today, and let’s keep up the fight
Over the years we have fought and won a large supermarket from being set up
in Oatley once, twice and three times and we will do it a again.
It is clear that this development is neither needed nor wanted.
If successful it would destroy two communities of Oatley and Oatley West and
many of the small businesses would be forced to go elsewhere or go broke.
Oatley is a village and we want to keep it that way.
Not one resident living in Oatley wishes to have the nature of their
peaceful suburb dramatically altered with an explosion of traffic, trucks and trolleys.
There is no doubt that our local roads won’t cope with the expected traffic demand by a supermarket.

This proposal has no interest in the feelings of many local residents and is only after profit.
Can anyone tell me how the Land and Environment Court (LEC) arrives at its decisions?
We urgently need reform of the Land And Environment Court. Write to all major political parties and call on them to draw up policies before the State Election on how they are going to reform the Land and Environment.

There are many Traffic problems which we don't need to be reminded off...
* Access for supply trucks is through residential streets.
* Supply truck entry and exit to loading dock is only via Mulga Rd which will cause congestion on collector road for Oatley West.
* Safety issues for pedestrian and vehicular traffic.
* Use of turntable in loading dock- turntables at other sites not used in practice, with trucks reverse into delivery bay.
* No designated truck waiting area for when loading dock occupied.

This proposal has many wholes...
I ask you all to maintain the rage and continue your opposition to a large supermarket being set up in Oatley.

Councillor Mark Coure"
PO Box 460
Hurstville NSW 2220
Mobile: 0417 255 999
Fax: 9580 5092
Email: markcoure@hotmail.com

Over 500 attend "No Coles in Oatley" Public Meeting

2005-11-28T23:04:00.000+11:00

Thursday 24th November, 2005
AGENDA
1. Welcome and introduction – Geoff Shearsby
2. Campaign overview – Ted Cooper,
Secretary of Oatley Residents Association
3. Kevin Greene, Member for Georges River
4. Hurstville City Council’s Position
Councillor Philip Sansom, Deputy Mayor of HCC
5. Coles’ response to meeting with ORAO representatives
– Carolyn Northcott, ORAO
6. Implications for Oatley Village
– Councillor Mark Coure, Kogarah Council
7. Coles AGM – Louise Radcliffe, ORAO
8. Construction work – Louise Radcliffe, ORAO
9. Resolutions
10. Questions

Resolution 1
In response to Coles’ proposed Supermarket Development (D.A. No. 204 0454) in Mulga Road, this meeting calls on Hurstville Council to continue to pursue all avenues – legal, political and otherwise -- to halt the supermarket development, including an appeal to the NSW Supreme Court, AND take out an injunction against Renaldo Plus 3 Pty Ltd to prevent further demolition or construction work being carried out until the Supreme Court appeal is heard.

Resolution 2
In the event that Coles proceeds with its lease in this ill-advised and inappropriate supermarket development, we resolve to boycott the store.

Resolution 3
This meeting calls on the Premier of NSW and the Government of NSW to amend The Land and Environment Court Act to give community interests a heavier weighting in judgments.

Shopping at Coles

2005-11-26T12:53:00.000+11:00

A small group of very well-behaved (naturally) and well-dressed (of course) residents (10 adults and 2 children) gathered outside Coles Hurstville soon after 10am today.

We quietly entered the store, slowly moving up and down the aisles taking our time deciding what to buy.

By the time a member of the Coles staff asked us to leave, only some of us had made our choice. When we politely challenged why we should have to leave (some of us still had purchases to make), we were asked to remove the propoganda. As T-shirts and badges were the only "propoganda" we had, one member took his shirt off. (And he looked all right too!)

We all lined up at the same register to make our purchases. Coles checkout chick Angela was a great sport, smiling the whole way through and even wished us luck. (Coles doesn't deserve her)

Members of the public approached us inside and outside the store, expressing interest and sympathy. In fact one lady said that she is no longer going to shop in a Coles supermarket.

All in all a very successful mission.

Urgent - PUBLIC MEETING 24 November

2005-11-17T15:53:00.000+11:00

Oatley West Public School

Oatley Park Road, Oatley

Thursday, 24th November, 2005
7:00 pm SHARP

A recent response from Coles implies no reconsideration !
Coles have admitted their own telephone survey showed a majority of residents against the supermarket - yet they still proceed ! Coles do not want to understand that the complete facts have not been presented properly & effectively in the law courts. (click here to see response)

Our next step is to appeal to the NSW Court Of Appeal (Supreme Court).

We urged you to contact our Council to take this next step - it is YOUR Council, now it is Council’s chance to amend for mistakes in the past that have put the residents in this situation! It will be much more expensive for council to accommodate Coles with infrastructure - ongoing every year - in a place never intended for this !

This may be your last opportunity to stop this immoral and inappropriate overdevelopment in Mulga Road !!

Media Directory

2005-11-16T19:26:00.000+11:00

Oatley David vs Coles Goliath by Evan Jones

Leader Articles
26 July "Residents, developer bicker" Jim Gainsford
4 August " Tall Order for Coles "

Letters to the Leader
August
23 August "Household a Coles free zone Nicole Harwick
" Small Shops Suffer" Nikki Finney
"Customer Shortage" Christine Magnusson
" Cherished Village" Thea Goulder
25 August "Building into a horror story by Ted Cooper
8 September"coles PR disaster" by David Koffel

October
6 October "Other suburbs at risk" by Ted Cooper
6 October" Oatley has the lot" by Betty & Doug Wickens
11 October " Loyal to business" by P. Andersen & S. Cullis
11 October " What fate awaits Oatley" by Kevin Orr
11 October" Worth fighting for" by Hannah Rose

November
8 November "Court short on Supermarket" by Margaret Davis

Letters to "The Leader" November

2005-11-16T13:21:00.000+11:00

Court short on supermarket

Can anyone tell me how the Land and Environment Court (LEC) arrives at its decisions?
This is not a frivolous question. I genuinely desire enlightenment.
Take an example, hypothetical of course. A block of suburban land becomes available. A property developer, with the assistance of a prominent retail chain, proposes to erect a complex of commercial and residential spaces including a supermarket run by the above chain.

The council may or may not like the idea at this stage but must submit it to its ratepayers.

Those in the relevant area emphatically do not want it. Their area has a distinctive, village character. It is well supplied with shops of many kinds and already has one supermarket, small but perfectly adequate. Anyway, there are big supermarkets in neighbouring suburbs, if wanted.

The council turns down the application.
The developer appeals to the LEC and is granted permission.
The ratepayers bombard the council with objections so it appeals the decision. It too is
successful so the developer counter-appeals. The only letters in the local press in support of the development are from people in other areas, not the one directly concerned.
How long can this go on? Appeal after appeal after appeal can achieve only one result — to line the pockets of the lawyers. Surely the LEC must see that if neither the council nor the local reisdents want the development it should be refused.

Margaret E Davis, Penshurst
The Leader, 8 November 2005

Nov and Dec letters to coles

2005-11-16T13:01:00.000+11:00

For the Attention of:
Roy Bridges & Melissa O’Neill

Yep, another Oatley resident with issues.

I could talk about how poorly we've been served by our council officers but that’s of little concern to you.
I could talk about traffic issues and my opinion of the certainty of accidents between vehicles and pedestrians but that’s just my speculative opinion.
I could talk about the Land & Environment court fiasco, considering the judge was unaware of the actual current use of the site but again that’s our problem not yours.

And I really mean it. I don't blame you for not becoming too involved in these issues when they are clearly not of your making nor is there anything you can do about them.

What I do want to mention to you, and possibly to your shareholders, is the concept of the 'lifetime value of a customer'.
If you're not across this, it's a way of valuing the total profit you would receive from a customer from their first transaction to their last over a period of time. It helps to know this when considering marketing budgets and how much is prudent to spend on acquiring and then holding a customer. It's about brand loyalty and the profits generated over time.

To my point. My family have been Coles customers for years, across four generations of market segment. That's good lifetime value from your marketing expense point of view. I remember very fondly our trips as kids to the Coles cafeteria when we were shopping in George Street in Sydney with my Grandmother. And then more recently brief stop-overs there with my own kids who are now nearly grown up. I know they enjoyed the experience of the dodgy food and weird ladies who worked there as much as we did. They may even have been tempted to introduce their future children to this bizarre right of passage if such a cafeteria still existed.

Except that they won't. They won't because our family, from Grandparents to little kids, won't be a Coles customer any more. And we won't be because Coles will have broken the trust in the relationship.

Actually we've already gone. Two weeks ago my wife and I were at the shopping centre at Riverwood (scary) to pick up a cake from Michels Bakery for a birthday. We decided to stop for a coffee. While we were sitting we realised that the Saturday morning shoppers seemed to be slow off the mark and that now would be a good time to get the supermarket shopping done. We looked at the Coles entry, looked at each other, and said, no.

Our kids have also said no, as have their Grand parents. We are no longer Coles customers and I wonder what that might be worth over a few generations. No weekly supermarket trolly's full, no lower priced brand store purchases (say BiLo), no cases of drink purchases, Christmas after Christmas, from any discount liquor stores. Not for as long as we continue to drive by a Coles sign that is not less than 100 metres from out front door.

You can consider the brand loyalty gone.

And you might have to re-think the marketing cost to re-acquire a lost customer. (I'm sure your own marketing people can give you the multiple of how hard it is to get a 'lost' customer back. Scary)

We may have been a good investment in the past, but the equation is now all one way. You can spend and spend and spend, but we won't.

The lifetime value of these few customers is now really easy to calculate. Nil.
We may of course not be alone, and we few may even talk badly about how we feel we've been treated as customers. Your marketing people can give you the numbers on how many people we are likely to talk badly about you too, but usually a minimum of ten. And then they talk. It could and up a reasonable size pyramid of people questioning their loyalty to Coles. And why wouldn't they? You will have made a major contribution to ruining the place where these families live.

But what if you decided to do the right thing by your customers. Ask your marketing people how many times we're likely to say nice things about Coles, but it's usually.. oh bugger it, you do the homework!

Do we really have to be this long winded about it to get you to see any kind of reason.

Either reason to do the right thing because it's simply the right thing, or reason because losing brand loyalty faithfully created by others over years is not only marketing criminal but financially stupid.

Plonk!

Thats the sound of the ball landing in your court.

See you at Woolies.
Sincerely
Tim Eaton

Melissa,
I write to you on behalf of my family who have lived in Oatley for some 30 years and in the St George area from birth.

Firstly we are not members of the Oatley committee against the development but we do support them as we are feeling very effected by the proposals. We live in Oatley West because of it's quiet location and as you can see by the background photo (coutesy Google earth), Oatley West does not suffer with any major road system in the area and is bordered by the Georges river and Oatley Park to it's South & West. We are known as the "garden suburb" of the Cronulla line and up to now have not been threatened by the gross urban developments that the current State Government is allowing to creep into life in Sydney.

It seems that the Coles organisation has been lured into the current unfortunate situation by the greedy developer who wants to change our way of life. He appears to be a typical hungry developer who seeks to change others way of life in an area that he does not know and does not live in. His development will not affect his family other than increasing their wealth.

If Coles proceeds into this development, like most others in Oatley West, our family will not be future customers of the company. This decision has been already taken throughout our family (we have 5 adult children all with families).
John & Rosemary Weidemier

Hi all,
I just wanted to voice my thanks for your continuing fight against Coles and the over development in Mulga Rd. We have today sent an email to Coles and will follow up with a phone call as well.
A BIG THANK YOU TO YOUR EFFORTS.
Maintain the Rage,
Regards,
Anne and Malcolm Thompson

Dear Mr Bridges and Ms O’Neill,

We are writing to you to voice our concern as a local resident in Oatley of the impact of the proposed location of a Coles supermarket in Mulga Road, Oatley.

I am sure you have had numerous concerns outlined to you in relation to this proposal, however in this short note I would like to focus on just three key points. We also declare we have no commercial interests whatsoever in the outcome of this proposal – we are simply residents seeking to preserve the neighborhood environment which we enjoy today. Are key objections are threefold:

1) Neighbourhood character - A supermarket of the proposed size is completely out of line with any other development within Oatley West. It is completely disproportionate to the current local community atmosphere of the local shops.

2) The noise and traffic caused by trucks servicing the shopping centre will be excessive for such a quiet suburban area. Of particular concern is any traffic movement whatsoever outside of normal business hours of 9am to 5pm Monday to Friday either due to trucks or cars attending the supermarket.

3) There is simply no compelling reason to introduce a supermarket in the area. We are currently very well serviced with a small supermarket in Oatley, numerous local shops in both Oatley West and Oatley, and large Coles supermarkets in Hurstville, Riverwood, Roselands and Hurstville South. The supermarket will add no value to the community whatsoever – it will only detract from the current pleasant residential precinct.

As a resident it is difficult to understand how a proposal such as this which is so completely out of character with the area can ever have got this far. One only needs to visit Mulga road and the surrounding area to understand how completely out of character this development is.

I implore you to put yourself in our shoes, consider your own local situation and imagine whether you would be taking the same stance as the vast majority of Oatley residents. Now put yourselves in Coles shoes – can you afford the clear community backlash that will result if Coles does proceed as the base tenant for this development. As a major Coles customer across Coles supermarket, Myer, Kmart and Target, where we estimate we spend in excess of $20,000 annually, we know we would not be alone in significantly changing our purchasing behaviour not just in relation to this local development but more broadly all Colesmyer stores as the community feels so strongly about this issue.

Please do not hesitate to contact Anne or myself if you would like to discuss our concerns in detail.

Kind regards,
Anne and Malcolm Thompson
Melissa O'Neill
Corporate Affairs Manager
CML Supermarkets
800 Toorak Road
Tooranga VIC 3146

Mr Roy Bridges
NSW State Manager,
Coles Supermarkets
62 Hume Hwy
Chullora NSW 2190

25 November 2005

Dear Roy and Melissa,

I refer my letter dated 15 November 2005 where I raised a number of concerns regarding the proposed Coles supermarket development for Mulga Road Oatley.

I have just read your response to the Oatley Residents Against Overdevelopment (OROA) that was sent to them on the 16 November 2005. I would like to respond to some items that are raised.

1. Traffic Management.
I cannot understand how Coles expects truck drivers to sit and wait patiently in another suburb if the loading dock is unavailable. In the past couple of years there have been numerous stories in the paper about truck drivers taking drugs and falsifying log books in order to get job done in time.1 Coles have been publicly slammed for having a definite ‘hands off’ approach with regards to the management of their trucks and truck drivers.2 Coles outsources its transport management3, how do you expect the store manager of the Oatley Store to have any control over a truck driver that does not even work for the same company as they do?

As discussed in my previous letter, coming from Randwick, I had to wait numerous times when I was in Coogee while the large Coles truck delivered supplies to the Coles Metro there – some times at 10pm at night!

2. Neighbourhood Character.
As you have correctly noted, this is a matter for the developer. Clearly a supermarket of 2100 square meters is out of character with the rest of the shops that are approx 70-100 square metres. This is not just a matter for the developer, Coles can CHOOSE NOT TO LEASE THE SITE.

3. Loss of Amenity
If the Coles at Oatley has been carefully designed to align with the needs to of the community, Coles would not be leasing the development. Your own market research shows that the majority of the residents do not approve of the development. Last night I attended a community meeting where the community resolved to boycott the store if it did open.

4. Safety
Any increase in the traffic volumes on the roads of Oatley will have an adverse impact on the safety of residents and children in the area. That is a given, the more traffic you have in an area, the greater the chance of an accident. The only way that Coles can improve the safety in the area is by NOT LEASING THE SITE.

5. Lack of Community Voice
Coles own market research shows that the majority of residents in Oatley do not want this development. The development may have complied with the development controls when the development was lodged, but these development controls have since changed, because of the amount of pressure put on the council by the residents. If no-one in the community wants the development – why is it happening?
Even other shareholders at the Coles AGM where shocked that Coles was going against the wishes of a community and opening a supermarket.4

Sincerely,

Kym Coleman

1 http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/06/18/1055828386542.html
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/11/12/1100131175454.html?from=storylhs
2 http://smh.com.au/news/National/MP-slams-big-retailer-over-drivers/2005/04/18/1113676704343.html
3 http://stcwa.org.au/journal/060805/1122508224_2105.html
4 http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2005/11/17/1132016925800.html

Reply from Coles after 10 Nov meeting

2005-11-13T14:57:00.000+11:00

Response to Oatley Residents Against Overdevelopment (ORAO)
Wednesday, 16 November 2005
To Anne Wagstaff, Hannah Rose, Carolyn Northcott and Ted Cooper
Thank you for taking the time to meet with us last Thursday, 10 November.
We found the meeting very productive and hope the following addresses the points you raised during the meeting.
1. Traffic management
Under the Hurstville City Council Road Hierarchy, Mulga Road is classified as a collector road. When the new development is completed, Mulga Road will not be narrowed. Off-street car parking will be available within the development.
A comprehensive Operation Management Plan was developed for Coles Oatley as part of the Development Application process. The plan is designed to minimise any potential impact on Mulga Rd and adjoining residences. Adherence to the plan is a condition of the Development Consent.
The Store Manager at Coles Oatley will ensure that the Operation Management Plan is adhered to, minimising the adverse impact on the residences and traffic on Mulga Road. All delivery drivers must call the store ahead of arrival in order to access the loading dock.
In the event that an unscheduled truck arrives and the loading dock is not free, the Store Manager will instruct the driver to reschedule the deliveries and return at a later time.
However, in cases when the waiting time for the loading dock is less than 30 minutes, the driver may be instructed to proceed to the nominated waiting area – the southern side of Roberts Avenue between Depot Road and Lorraine Street.
All delivery drivers servicing the Coles Oatley store will be issued clear instructions to conduct themselves in a manner that respects the nature of the surrounding area. Coles staff will closely monitor all deliveries made to the store and will report incidents to our supplier as required. Failure to observe the above instructions may result in that driver being banned from entering the Coles Oatley site.
The Land and Environment Court did not determine that supply trucks should only enter and exit delivery dock by right-hand turn. Coles put this measure in place, in consultation with traffic experts, to minimise unnecessary noise made by Coles delivery trucks using Mulga Road.
The installation of a turntable facility in the loading dock was a requirement of the developer’s Development Application being approved. This facility will be fully operational and correctly utilised at all times.
It is most important that residents quickly bring any concerns to Coles’ attention at all times. To do this, residents should phone Coles Oatley and detail their concern. A second contact point is Coles Customer Relations team (toll free) on 1800 061 562 where all issues are logged by an operator – it is Coles policy to respond to each issue, where possible within two working days.
2. Neighbourhood character
Whilst this is really a matter for the developer, Renaldo Gaiety, I understand that the Land and Environment Court found the developer’s proposal legally complied with Hurstville Council’s own zoning regulations as well as development controls imposed by the Council itself.
I also understand that those concerns tabled by residents about the change in amenity, size of the store, traffic and noise were addressed during the Court proceedings and the Court found that the proposal had properly addressed the concerns.
3. Loss of amenity
Coles Oatley will be at the smaller end of our store range and has been carefully designed to align with the retail needs of the Oatley area as well as the existing shopping strip.
We believe that Coles Oatley will enhance the local shopping facilities as well as increase customer choice and convenience for the Oatley community and offer new employment opportunities in the community.
It is proposed that Coles Oatley shopping trolleys will be coin-operated, whereby the customer receives their coin deposit back upon return of the trolley. In addition, the Mulga Road site offers plenty of off-street parking underground. We believe these two factors, together with customer education that reminds customers it is discourteous to take trolleys from the store premises, will ensure sound trolley management.
4. Safety
As I outlined above, under the Hurstville City Council Road Hierarchy Mulga Road is classified as a collector road.
The size of delivery vehicles servicing Coles Oatley must not be greater than 11m. This is a condition of the Development Consent. The size of these delivery vehicles will be similar to the size of vehicles currently servicing the existing shopping strip.
The delivery schedule planned for Coles Oatley West is set for up to 7 main truck deliveries per day (less than one truck delivery per hour between 7am and 7pm). Other deliveries will occur Monday to Friday via smaller delivery vehicles (no more than 20 per day).
The Coles Oatley Store Manager will ensure that all direct deliveries and pick-ups are co-ordinated so that truck movements in and out of the loading dock will not breach delivery restrictions.
It is my understanding that the development of this site will not impact on the footpath along Mulga Road and the Land and Environment Court has found that with the frequency of
deliveries and with a reasonable level of care by drivers and pedestrians, pedestrian safety should not be an issue.
5. Lack of community voice
The developer’s application complies with Hurstville Council zoning regulations as well as development controls imposed by the Council itself.
Once again, this is a matter for the developer but I understand those concerns tabled by residents about the change in amenity, size of the store, traffic and noise were addressed during the Court proceedings and the Court found that the proposal had properly addressed the concerns.
The Land and Environment Court is the appropriate administrative body in cases such as this and it would be inappropriate for me to comment on the Court’s operating structure.
I trust this letter addresses your concerns. Once again, thank you for taking the time to meet with us.
Roy Bridges
State Manager – NSW & ACT
Coles Myer Supermarkets

No Coles Update

2005-11-11T14:20:00.000+11:00

Hurstville City Council’s appeal to the Land and Environment Court is unsuccessful
On 1st November, Justice Pain, of the Land and Environment Court, dismissed HCC’s appeal and handed down a decision in favour of supermarket developer Renaldo Plus 3 Pty Ltd. This decision is a further step towards the development of a large mixed commercial and residential development at 45-67 Mulga Road, Oatley West.

Since the LEC decision, a delegation of four ORAO representatives has met with senior Coles executives, Mr Roy Bridges and Ms Melissa O’Neill. The ORAO team was invited to table the concerns of Oatley residents and presented a powerful and broad-ranging argument, covering traffic movement, loss of amenity, zoning inconsistencies, safety and our loss of democratic voice in the legal process. Click here to see a summary

To their credit, the Coles representatives seemed to be genuinely listening and revealed during discussion the results of a recent telephone survey conducted for the company. Surprise, surprise! The majority of residents of Oatley and surrounding suburbs are opposed to the development.

COLES IS CLEARLY RECONSIDERING ITS TENANCY.

Oatley residents have a real chance of convincing Coles now to withdraw from this unwanted and inappropriate development. The outcome, however, depends on the actions of us all!
Please write, email, phone or fax both Roy Bridges and Melissa O’Neill as soon as possible. ORAO’s document outlining residents’ concerns, as presented at the meeting(click here) with Coles, can be found at the website and can be used for guidance, if needed.
Email us a copy if you want it published on the web: nocoles@oatleypark.com

Mr Roy Bridges
NSW State Manager,
Coles Supermarkets
62 Hume Hwy
Chullora NSW 2190
(02) 9795 7113
roy.bridges@colesmyer.com.au

Melissa O'Neill
Corporate Affaires Manager
CML Supermarkets
800 Toorak Road
Tooranga VIC 3146
(03) 98293486
400 587 232
melissa.o'neill@colesmyer.com.au
ORAO is commissioning an internationally renowned pedestrian safety expert to prepare a report to present to Coles. Any financial assistance would be greatly appreciated.

DID YOU KNOW ?:

* On more than 5 occasions in 2004, Ted Cooper, Secretary of Oatley Residents Association, wrote to and met with HCC staff and elected representatives to urge Council to amend the 3(a) General Business Zone to ‘small neighbourhood shopping centres’. NO ACTION TAKEN

* Council staff failed to refer the DA to the RTA as required by state legislation.

* Council staff failed to refer the DA to Council’s Local Traffic Committee, as recommended by guidelines, until after court proceeding had commenced.

* Council’s Traffic Engineer determined the development would produce ‘significant traffic impact’. This finding was later hosed down to ‘low impact’ in the Development Assessment Officer’s report to Council recommending approval of the DA.

* Council’s Traffic Engineer supports the idea of narrowing Mulga Rd by 2m at the site.

* Justice Pain’s judgment on HCC’s Land and Environment Appeal, when denying any grounds for impact of neighbourhood character, refers to the site as currently being “small shops”.

Summary of Documents presented to Coles 10 Nov 05

2005-11-11T14:08:00.000+11:00

OATLEY RESIDENTS AGAINST OVERDEVELOPMENT (ORAO)
ORAO, backed by a majority of Oatley residents, has several areas of concern in relation to Renaldo Plus 3 Pty Ltd’s proposed commercial/residential development at 47-67 Mulga Rd Oatley:

1. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT
* Access for supply trucks:
– Limitations on access to the development from East Oatley due to (a) low and narrow railway underpass (b) one-lane railway overpass, and (c) 3 tonne weight restrictions on Hurstville Road (regional road) between 7pm and 7am.
– Limitations mean delivery traffic will be forced to use narrow residential streets not designed for constant heavy vehicle traffic.
– Mulga Road will be narrowed to only 9m.

* Supply truck entry and exit to loading dock only via Mulga Rd:
– Land and Environment Court’s ruling that, due to narrowness of Mulga Road, supply trucks only enter and exit delivery dock by right-hand turn.
– Requirement for delivery trucks to cross traffic for access will lead to heavy congestion on one of the busiest access roads for Oatley West.
– Operational experience of turntable facilities in loading docks indicates that turntable not used in practice and trucks reverse into the delivery bay, creating further congestion.

* Management Operation Plan:
– LEC ruling in favour of development despite truck waiting area not having been specified or approved. Residents are concerned that residential streets will be used as waiting zones.
– The MOP specifies strict rules of operation -- for example, relating to truck sizes and the loading dock. But who will ensure adherence to the MOP? What guarantees and what recourse will residents have?

2. NEIGHBOURHOOD CHARACTER
* Height and density of proposed development is out of character with small neighbourhood shopping village and the residential surrounds.
* Proposed development exploits typographical error on HCC LEP Amendment 38. The site was never intended for such large-scale commercial development.
* The result is GROSS OVERDEVELOPMENT of the site.

3. LOSS OF AMMENITY
* Increased vehicular traffic, from both trucks and cars, will reduce the highly prized ‘tranquility’ of Oatley by drawing traffic to a peninsular suburb.
* The visual and noise impact of the development will reduce amenity of nearby residences, particularly those to the front and rear of the development and on the traffic route for delivery vehicles.
* The inevitable increase in litter and scattered shopping trolleys will increase pollution and further add to the loss of visual amenity.

4. SAFETY:
* Pedestrian safety:
- Southern footpath on Mulga Rd is one of main pedestrian routes to Oatley station and bus stop. Each day, many, many pedestrians -- including schoolchildren – will be crossing the entry to the loading dock.
- If operational experience with other delivery dock turntables is an indication, pedestrian safety will be put at severe risk by reversing delivery trucks across main footpath to station.
- In addition, the narrowness of this footpath below the proposed development poses safety concerns with increased traffic flows, particularly heavy vehicles.
- Lack of pedestrian footpaths on residential access routes means pedestrians forced to share roads with increased supermarket traffic and trucks.
* Vehicle safety:
- Blinding effect of afternoon sunlight is greatest at point of loading dock entry, where all trucks will be crossing the traffic flow. This ‘glare effect’ is greatest at mid-late afternoon and will coincide with the predicted peak supermarket traffic flow at 4.30-5.30pm.
- Local traffic will be forced to share narrow residential streets with delivery trucks, at times forcing single lane traffic flow.

5. LACK OF COMMUNITY VOICE:
* Renaldo Gaiety has repeatedly ignored the community voice – he has been told on many occasions, both at public meetings and in one-to-one conversations, that a large supermarket is not considered appropriate for the site and will be unwanted.

* Ignoring the intent of Council and previous zoning classifications regarding zoning Amendments. Exploitation of a zoning error by Council.
* Lack of democracy in the Land and Environment Court process – residents’ voice not taken into consideration by the Court.

Maintain The Rage

2005-11-02T13:10:00.000+11:00

Oatley Residents are angry that they have no say in developments in their suburb. The Land and Environment Court handed down its decision on 1 November 2005, ruling that the Coles supermaket development be allowed on Mulga Road Oatley. Please urge Councillors of Hurstville City Council to appeal this decision. To see Judgment click here

Contact Coles Tell them them what you think
Melissa O'Neill, Corporate Affairs Manager, Coles Supermarkets
Phone: 0400 587 232
Email: Melissa.O'Neill@Colesmyer.com.au

Have you voiced your opinion suggestions to Mr. Renaldo Gaiety ?
P.O. Box 403
Brighton Le Sands
NSW 2216
Phone: 95292575

Leader Letters October

2005-10-11T13:45:00.000+10:00

Loyal to local business
If Wayne C and Rob, both otherwise anonymous, (Your View, September 27) are so serious in their support for Coles, why don’t they provide to council the name of their street?

A traffic management plan could then be devised that ensures delivery trucks doing the Coles
run are diverted past their homes.

We should declare no personal stake in this as we are away from the route . Trucks won’t be passing our door, belching fumes into our windows, making noise in the early hours or threatening our pedestrian safety. But we do feel for people whose quiet residential streets will be transformed in this way.

And as for the perceived benefits of a Coles, we would say that we have always been grateful for the quality and variety that the small supermarkets, delicatessens, newsagents, florists, butchers, cake, bread, fish and liquor stores of Oatley have provided.

We feel loyalty toward the hardworking, friendly and community minded people who run those small businesses.
Phillip Andersen and Sharyn Cullis
Oatley
Leader 11 October 2005

What fate awaits Oatley?
Brooke Wallace (Your View, September 30) describes graphically what happens to small towns invaded by supermarkets.

In the 1 950s we lived in a small English village, Redhill. in Surrey. about 32km south of London. It was an olde world market town of picture postcard charm.

Revisted 30 years later, this quaint village has been replaced by supermarkets and car parks.

Is this to be the fate of Oatley village?
Kevin Orr
Blakehurst
Leader 11 October 2005

Worth fighting for
As the mother of a young child, I add my voice in opposition against the Coles proposal.
I believe it will threaten many characteristics of Oatley West and Oatley Village —the quiet, clean environmental ambience with many parks; the small friendly neighbourhood businesses (who support local community groups such as Lions and schools) and safe streets to walk/cycle on.
I have never been involved in community action before but believe it is definitely worth fighting to retain the qualities of our lovely suburb that we hold dear.

I, for one, would like our children to thank us for standing up to developers and big business trying to impose an unnecessary and inappropriate supermarket complex here.
Hannah Rose
Oatley West
Leader 11 October 2005

Other suburbs at risk
Some people are irritated by the protests from Oatley residents against the proposal for a
regional supermarket, three times the size of Franklins at Mortdale, to be built in the small neighbourhood centre of Oatley West.

These protests by Oatley residents result from a loophole in the council’s planning controls. This loophole is being used to gain approval t for the supermarket by circumventing council’s intention to restrict centres like Mulga Road to small neighbourhood shops.

This restriction to small shops is intended to apply to all small neighbourhood shopping at centres such as Lugamo, Peakhurst Heights, Penshurst West, etc and corner shop sites.

Oatley Residents Association made many representations to the council over the past year for this loophole to be closed but was unsuccessful. The council has now belatedly arranged for the minister to approve appropriate amendments to make the council’s intention clearer.

These representations have resulted in the council’s planning controls being amended to stop overdevelopment.
Ted Cooper
Oatley Residents Association Inc.
Leader 6 October 2005

Oatley has the lot
In response to the letters “Shopping around for
supermarket support” and “Come on, get a
life” (Your View, September 27).

We have lived at Oatley since 1966 and find
the shopping all we require.

Our speciality shops, together with the general
stores, gives us all we need without going out of
the suburb.

For a small charge, the IGA supermarket will
deliver as will many of the other shops.

The proposed supermarket does have plenty
of parking but the problem is trucks, estimated
at 30 a day and all the other cars that will use
this facility have to use inadequate roads to access it.
Take a look at the main one in question, Mulga Road.
Betty and Doug Wickens.
Oatley
Leader 6 October 2005

Appeal Hearing

2005-10-10T09:34:00.000+10:00

All welcome to attend either day at any session.
Hurstville City Council’s appeal in the Land & Environment Court regarding the supermarket in Mulga Rd will be held:

WHEN: Monday, 17th October
Tuesday, 18th October

TIME: 10 am. – 4pm.
(session times may vary at Judge’s discretion)

WHERE: 225 Macquarie St, Sydney
The Land and Environment Court Registry - Windeyer Chambers
(diagonally opposite Sydney Eye Hospital &30metres walk from the top of Martin Place towards Hyde Park )

Hurstville City Council V Renaldo Plus 3 Pty Ltd

Noticeboards displaying the daily court lists are located on the ground floor and on the Registry level (level 4). Court rooms are located on Levels 13, 12, 11, 10, 5, 3 and 1 of the same building.
Further information : www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/lec

All welcome to attend either day at any session.

Contact for Developer and Coles

2005-09-29T12:34:00.000+10:00

Melissa O'Neill, Corporate Affairs Manager, Coles Supermarkets
has left Coles Myer any further email correspondence should be directed to: corporate.affaires@colesmyer.com.au

Coles Customer Relations toll free number 1800 061 562

Have you voiced your opinion suggestions to Mr. Renaldo Gaiety ?
P.O. Box 403
Brighton Le Sands
NSW 2216

Phone: 95292575

Why is Mr. Renaldo not listening to the residents who have to live with this development? Why is no consideration given to the residents saying no to a supermarket. The intial draft plans at the public consultation were 1000sq metres then 1500 sq at the DA submitted in July 2004. Now we hear it is over 2000sq metres! When will it stop growing? Is greed getting in the way?

Is Coles Push Polling?

2005-09-22T13:12:00.000+10:00

Coles is undertaking market research amongst Oatley residents to gauge the ‘Coles in Oatley' issue. A few people who have had calls and one suggested that the line of questioning was more like ‘push polling’.

This is a technique most commonly used by the political parties around election time. Under the guise of ‘market research’, the function of the polling is actually to persuade voters/residents to change their mind about an issue. In this case, the ‘leading’ questions ask about jobs created in the Oatley area by Coles – it’s hard to deny that the supermarket will create jobs, although very likely at the expense of a great deal more.

One of the concluding questions is whether the resident has changed their mind during the course of the survey, further indications that this is push polling rather than a true desire to read residents' support or opposition for the development.

If you are as incensed that Coles has now resorted to such an underhanded tactic to raise support for this unwanted development, then let both Gerry Masters or Melissa O’Neill know via email:
Gerry.masters@colesmyer.com.au
Melissa.o’neill@colesmyer.com.au

Support Local Business - Thanks to our sponsors

2005-09-21T11:05:00.000+10:00

Many local business generously donated to our cause. Please support the following businesses:
Oatley IGA, Oatley Pde
Clock Butcher, Oatley Pde
Pilates Naturally, Oatley Plaza
CFS Dental, Andrew Ng & Clarissa Szeman, Mulga Rd
Budget Petrol, Oatley Pde
Quality Auto Search, Frederick St
Riley’s Garage, Mulga Rd
Scrummies Deli, Letitia St
Lynne’s Homemade Gourmet Mulga Rd
In Bud Florists, Mulga Rd
Barolo’s Restaurant, Oatley Plaza
Cristina’s Nails, Oatley Pde
Cynthia’s Electrolysis & Skin Care, Oatley Pde
Trebob Seafood Restaurant, Mulga Rd
Franklin’s, Morts Rd Mortdale
Bresnahan’s Fine Foods, Morts Rd Mortdale
Oatley Optical, Frederick St
Oatley Fruit Market, Frederick St
Health Herbs & Healing, Frederick St
Scents of Life Aromatherapy, Frederick St
Chilli Man Thai Restaurant, Letitia St
Oatley Cellars, Letitia St
Ambrosia Delicatessen, Mulga Road
SG Hair, The Strand Penshurst
Coconut Ice, Mulga Rd
Oatley Chinese and Malaysian Restaurant, Mulga Road
Mortdale Tropics, Morts Road Mortdale
Tuffy’s Tender Meats, Morts Road Mortdale
Oatley Photos, La Delle Arte, Oatley Plaza
Oatley Physiotherapy and Sports Injury Centre, Frederick St
La Spezia Restaurant, Oatley Pde
Emma James Boutique, Frederick St
Extra Ugly Olive Oil, Oatley Plaza
Oatley Village Seafood, Frederick St
Oatley Café, Oatley Plaza
O’Connors Pharmacy, Frederick St
Evolution Hairdressing, Mulga Road
Mullane’s Pharmacy, Mulga Road
Oatley West Newsagency, Mulga Rd
Oatley Village Newsagency, Frederick St
Oatley West Medical Centre, Dr Jangda, Mulga Rd
Oatley Pies, Oatley Pde
Dolce Espresso, Letitia St
Letitia Medical Centre, Letitia St

NoColes Picnic

2005-09-12T14:38:00.000+10:00

"No Coles in Oatley" picnic in Oatley Memorial Gardens, organised by Oatley Residents Against Overdevelopment (ORAO) was a great community-together.

Up to 1,000 residents had a fun day, with activities to cater for the whole community:

* Colouring competition which is being sent to Coles for judging

* Face painting

* Giant pinata which the children enjoyed hitting Click Here to SEE MORE PHOTOS

* "The face of Coles" mask painting competition

* Ball in the hole (of Coles)

Those who attended were entertained by the fantastic music provided by the Georges River Band and members of the local community. Local businesses generously donated towards a monster raffle with over 50 prizes, enabling the group (ORAO) to have a fighting fund. The wonderful Oatley Lions Club generously manned BBQ.

The crowd was very enthusiastic. The atmosphere was very friendly.

Both Hurstville Mayor Joanne Morris and Kogarah Councillor Mark Coure spoke in support of the community’s actions. Both councils have provided assistance to this community effort.

The hugely successful day culminated in the formation of the words "No Coles" by locals attired in the distinctive and very popular "No coles in Oatley" T-shirts

"No coles in Oatley " Picnic

2005-09-11T19:02:00.000+10:00

A great time was had by all. Thanks to all who attended.Thank you to all the local business who geneoursly donated prizes.

Fun at "No Coles Picnic Day"

2005-09-11T14:45:00.000+10:00

"Yum"Thanks Lions

Monster Pinata Was a hit!

Georges River Band

Face Painting

Ball in the Hole of Coles

Colouring in comptetion

The "Face of Coles" Mask Painting

Young Talent

The Young Once

Legal Documets

2005-09-06T20:56:00.000+10:00

Land & Environment Court Judgement
Renaldo Plus 3 Ltd v Hurstville City Council [22/12/2006] NSWLEC 819

Land & Environment Court Judgement on Mulga Road Development
Renaldo Plus 3 Ltd v Hurstville City Council [12/07/2005] NSW LEC 315

Appeal to LEC
Land & Environment Court Judgement on Mulga Road Development
Renaldo Plus 3 Pty Limited v Hurstville City Council [No 2] [2005] NSWLEC 590

Other Cases cited in judgement
Terrace Tower Holdings Pty Ltd v Sutherland Shire Council (2003)NSWCA 289

Architects Haywood and Bakker Pty Ltd v North Sydney Council (2003) NSWLEC 138

Stockland Developments Pty Ltd v Manley Council [2004] NSWLEC 472

Legislation Relevant to case

Amendment 60 to LEP - gazetted 14 October 2005
This intended to limit height restriction of the area to two storey height limit to include Peakhurst ward which had been inadverdently removed when amendment 38 was made.

15A Height restrictions for land within Zones Nos 3 (a) and 3 (c)
(1) Despite any other provision of this plan, buildings exceeding 2 storeys in height must not be erected on so much of the land within Zone No 3 (a) or 3 (c) as is shown edged heavy black on the height map for Zones Nos 3 (a) and 3 (c).

(2) In this clause:

height map for Zones Nos 3 (a) and 3 (c) means Sheets 1–20 of the map marked “Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 1994—Height Map for Zones Nos 3 (a) and 3 (c)”, as amended by the maps (or specified sheets of maps) marked as follows:

Amendment 66 to LEP - gazetted 9 September 2005
Changed the name of zone 3(a) from General Business to Neighbourhood Business and generally make it clearer that zone 3(a) was always intended for small neighbourhood shops.

Zone No 3 (a) (Neighbourhood Business Zone)

Zone objectives

The objectives of this zone are:

(a) to provide for small scale retail and business activities to serve the needs of the surrounding local community, and

(b) to provide for development of a scale and type compatible with the amenity of the surrounding residential area, and

13A Size of display or sales area in shops on land within Zone No 3 (a)

(1) The maximum area that may be used as a display or sales area in a shop that is on land within Zone No 3 (a) is 400 square metres.

(2) In calculating the area used as a display or sales area, any part of the shop that is ancillary to the display or sales area or that is used for storage, office or staff convenience purposes is to be excluded.

Developer declines to meet reidents

2005-09-06T13:11:00.000+10:00

Renaldo Gaiety has declined to meet reidents opposed to a supermarket at Mulga RoadLeader: 6 September 05

No Coles in Oatley Picnic 11 September

2005-09-04T14:42:00.000+10:00

Memorial Gardens from 11am till 2pm

* Activities from 11am till 2pm

* "the face of Coles" mask painting,
face painting and monster piñata!

* Sausage sizzle * Great music * Raffle

* “No Coles in Oatley” T-shirts for sale: $15 each or 2 for $25

B.Y.O rug or chair. An aerial photo will be taken at approximately 12.30pm

Watch "No Coles" Oatley video

2005-08-28T01:13:00.000+10:00

On Friday night, ABC's Stateline program featured our fight against this development. To view some of the video, click the links below:

For broadband internet (large file) Play/Download
For dial-up internet (small file) Play/Download

Shadow Planning Minister visits Oatley

2005-08-26T12:30:00.000+10:00

Chris Hartcher MP, NSW Shadow Minister for Planning Administration visited Oatley West to meet with residents inorder to gain an understanding of the impact of Coles' proposed supermarket on the local community.

Ring Roy

2005-08-20T14:57:00.000+10:00

NSW Manager, Coles Supermarkets (02) 9795 7113

Tell him what you think.

T SHIRTS FOR SALE

2005-08-20T13:07:00.000+10:00

Become a walking protest buy a T Shirt

Baby T Shirts
Pink & blue 00 and
Boys and girls white size 0
Cost $12
ContactHannahRose by email: hannahrose1999@yahoo.com

Adult T Shirts now in stock
Please contact Brooke Wallace 9570 7467 after 3.30 pm weekdays to order adult T Shirts.
One for $15
2 for $25
3 for $35
4 for $45

Alex Pinnok from

2005-08-16T14:56:00.000+10:00

To Whom It May Concern:
As a former employee of Coles supermarkets as a Service Assistant I must say that I honestly fell for the “Coles Cares” marketing trap. During induction videos as well as messages from head office which came through to our store, I genuinely got the impression that Coles Supermarkets cared for not only it's employees but for it's customers. How wrong I was. It was only a couple of weeks ago that it was brought to my attention that Coles plans on building a supermarket in the quiet suburb of Oatley. As has been already brought to the attention of so many people, Oatley is in very close distance to both Hurstville, Roselands and Riverwood. On hearing the news of this proposal, a number of questions have come to mind including:

- Why would Coles build a supermarket in Oatley in the first place?
I genuinely cannot understand how Coles would consider building a supermarket as big as Coles in a Suburb the size of Oatley. As mentioned previously, Coles supermarkets are already readily available to Oatley residents through other nearby stores. If you add to this huge protest already put in by residents, and the potential for Oatley residents to boycott the new store, it would be surprising if this new Coles store could remain profitable after building costs. At the end of the day a major corporation like Coles Myers purpose is to generate cash. This is achieved by using strategical thinking and careful planning The proposal for a Coles store in Oatley cannot be considered at all strategic and one must question, “Why Oatley”?

- The Coles Cares Policy.
I question the Coles Cares policy. How can a company who states they value customers opinions, ignore community pleas? Understand that I am not being ignorant. I can accept that Coles Myer is a multi million dollar corporation whose objective is to become the clear market leader for retail services combining value for money products with exceptional customer service. But please, this is a small decision for Coles supermarkets to make, but a huge issue for the residents of Oatley.

In summing up, I'm not going to ramble on about how the residents of Oatley are going to boycott all of the Coles Myer stores, but I will ask that Coles please takes into consideration the values and beliefs of this community, and decides that it would be against the policies Coles Supermarkets have in place of caring for communities.

Reconsider your decision, from my experience Coles does care, it would be a great shame to see what I thought was a company supporting communities to turn it all in for one extra store.

Alexander Pinnock

Hurstville Council fights on to stop Mulga Road supermarket

2005-08-09T21:34:00.000+10:00

Hurstville City Council today lodged an appeal, under Section 56A of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979, in response to the Court's June ruling that allows the construction of a supermarket in Mulga Road, Oatley.

"Legal advice received by Council indicates that there are sound grounds to base an appeal on," said Hurstville Mayor, Clr Joanne Morris. "It is imperative that Council explores all reasonable avenues to stop this inappropriate development in Mulga Road."

Council, through its legal representatives, will be basing its appeal on points of law and the belief that the Commissioner erred in his Judgment.

For more information, contact:
Paul Spyve, Manager, Customer Relations: 9330 6008, 0411 748 953
Jo Reid, Communications Officer, 9330 6067, 0413 738 606

Traffic in Mulga Road will be DREADFUL as a result of the proposed development!

2005-08-06T14:39:00.000+10:00

Traffic in Mulga Road will be DREADFUL as a result of the proposed development!

The road being narrowed by more than 2 metres
Car parking in that length of Mulga Rd will be lost.
Loss of parking outside residences
Large 11 metre long trucks leaving the site down the hill
Trucks turning into Waratah Street, a street without footpaths,
Increased risk of accidents to pedestrians. as trucks enter and leave development

In the photo below an accident is depicted: a pedestrian has beenknocked to the road.

Letters to Coles

2005-08-05T22:47:00.000+10:00

Supermarket in the wrong place

Macklan Gordon Gridley JP, Neutral Bay

John Davoren and Judith Malcolm

Letter from wife of former Federal Member

Oatley Residents Association letter to Counci

Alex Pinnok - Resident of Bonnet Bay and past employee of Coles

More Letters to Coles - letters for November/December

Tall Order for Coles

2005-08-05T14:08:00.000+10:00

To date our local supermarket has supplied the three primary schools in Oatley with 12 computers. I wonder how Coles intends to contribute to our community

Carlolyn Northcott
Oatley
Leader 4 August 2005

Print Media Archive

2005-08-02T21:39:00.000+10:00

Oatley David vs Coles Goliath by Evan Jones Saturday, August 20, 2005

Battle looming on trolley front' The Leader 2 August 2005 (pdf 249Kb)

"Artistic Licence" The Leader 26 July 2005

2GB Drive Time with Philip Clark

2005-08-02T12:02:00.000+10:00

An Oatley Resident was on air today giving a great summary of the Oatley problem on 2GB Drive time. Thank you Philip Clark for giving some air time to voice our concerns and highlight an issue for every person that shops for groceries (which is the majority of us):

The loss of neighbourhood shopping to formulaic selling machines foistered on communities by mega corporations. It is time to stand up and voice your opinion not accept what you are told is good for you!

Ring your favourite radio station get on to talk back radio. Adopt a journalist, write to your favourite journalist, convince them it is an issue they should be looking into. A list of some media contact follow.

"Leader" paper's photo shoot Sunday

2005-07-31T22:16:00.000+10:00

Hundreds turned up on Sunday afternoon to say
"No" to Coles at 47-67 Mulga Rd Oatley

If you would like to help stop the construction of a Coles supermarket consisting of :
* a single retail space of 1890sq m (3 x the size of Franklins Mortdale)
* 3 storeys above natural ground level
* 2 storey underground car parking (150 cars + per day) plus
* 60 truck movements per day through residental streets from early morning till 10pm at night

Please feel free to display signs, "No Coles" white plates or wear white masks to represent the asbestos on site that will need to be removed!

Welcome to Oatley Residents Against Overdevelopment !

2005-07-29T14:48:00.000+10:00

What can you do to help ?

watch out for any movement on the site & report immediately to one of the group listed below
be ready to attend the site at Mulga Rd when a committee member rings to inform that work has commenced
if you are a train commuter please park your car near the site, on either side of Mulga Rd
ring talk-back radio stations, television or any other media about your concerns
help to man desk outside IGA Oatley ( contact Carolyn Northcott - 9585 8593)
write letters to Coles as per attached letter box leaflet
sign petition & encourage neighbours & each family member (remember to sign only once per person)
if you hear lots of continuous hooting of car horns - this is a signal to get to the site (preferably with your car)
send this email to family, neighbours & friends - remind them to take all of the above actions as well!

If you wish to offer even more help don't hestitate to contact a committe member. Any offers of practical or financial help would be appreciated.

Cold shoulder on special in Oatley

2005-07-29T12:20:00.000+10:00

Can anyone give us advice on how we can get rid of unwanted, uninvited guests? The suburb of Oatley has, for some reason, been targeted by Coles for one of its supermarkets. As we are a reasonable, decent group of residents, we politely told Coles we didn't want or need it here.

Unfortunately, Coles doesn't seem to care about what our little community wants or needs. Or thinks it knows better.

Any ideas how we can deal with a greedy, insensitive multinational company which is determined to trample over the little people in order to continue its quest to destroy all local small businesses?

M. Sheehan and C. Swift Oatley
Letter to Editor, SMH.

Avoid everyday

M. Sheehan and C. Swift in Oatley (SMH Letters, July 29), my suggestion would be, once Coles moves in, never shop there. There is a superette in the area, as well as grocery stores near Oatley station and at Mortdale. Hit Coles in a way it will understand - its profits. If no one shops at Coles, it cannot remain open for long.

Kym Coleman, Randwick

Artistic Licence

2005-07-26T14:29:00.000+10:00

Leader 26 July 2006

Why Oatley neither needs or wants another super-market

2005-07-24T09:41:00.000+10:00

Sent: Sunday, 24 July 2005 11:12 PM
To: John Fletcher
Cc: Gerry Masters
Subject: No supermarket for Oatley West.

Dear Mr Fletcher and Mr Masters,

You may be aware that Coles is considering a tenancy for a super-market in a development by "Renaldo plus 3" in Oatley West in Sydney.

I am a resident of Oatley West and must register my total opposition to this proposal.

To put this simply and clearly, Oatley neither needs or wants another super-market of any brand.

Oatley is a wonderful close knit community.I love living here.This is quite remarkable in any city these days and makes Oatley a special place.It's worth fighting for.

The area in question is quiet and surrounded by residential properties on all sides.
It has very poor access for shoppers and delivery vehicles entering or exiting the property.At certain times of the day the Sun makes the access road quite dangerous.One end of the access road is narrow and becomes a one lane rail underpass for anything a bit bigger than a family wagon.
All trucks and cars entering / exiting will cross a footpath crossed daily by many hundreds of commuters and school kids heading for the station and the local schools.
All streets that will carry your trucks are residential streets.Some only see trucks when the garbage is collected once a week.This a fact.
The excavation of thousands of tonnes of rock and ensuing construction for nearly 12 months will be a massive inconvenience and disturbance to our community
It is going to make a lot of residents very, very angry.

One of the prime reasons I paid the high price of purchasing here is because it is a quiet and safe area on a peninsula with no through traffic.It is however still very close and convenient to larger shopping precincts at Hurstville, Roselands and Riverwood.These are minutes away and all have a Coles super-market.

Because Oatley is on a peninsula the vast majority of potential customers will be Oatley residents most of whom do not want this to go ahead.I cannot see people outside of Oatley coming to shop here.It is out of the way to do so.

Why make enemies of your potential or current customers ?

I can see where you may wish to gain entry into an IGA suburb but I daresay many of us here are already Coles shoppers at one of the above sites.My family is to a very large degree.

I will assure you that my family will happily re-direct our not inconsiderable shopping dollars away from all Coles Myer stores if you go ahead with a tenancy in this appalling development.

In Coles super-markets alone we spend in excess of $10,000 per year let alone Target , K-Mart, Myer et al.

We have 2 young kids and our spending will only increase over the next 15 years.

We are only one family but multiply that by hundreds of families and it is a considerable loss of revenue.

Not only will a store in Oatley possibly cannibalise sales in the abovementioned locations it will more likely cost overall sales by inviting a public relations backlash and a general boycott of Coles Myer brands by a community that is overwhelmingly against a development of this kind and size in our suburb.

The proposal was voted down unanimously by council with over 450 locals in attendance.Hundreds turned up at the on-site hearing of the Land and Environment Court.

Our fight has the full and on going support of our Mayor, the councillors, our State and Federal Members and their Opposition.

Please take a locals advice, it is a poorly positioned and ill advised development that will cost Coles considerable custom and ask you and Mr Masters reconsider and walk away from this.In fact it would be a considerable PR coup with people in this area to do so.

In closing, it is interesting and perhaps revealing to note that your potential developer invokes the name of a major competitor to try and sell this disaster to the community.

I quote. "This is a boutique supermarket that will have the ambience of a David Jones Food Hall".

I don't care if he plans a replica of the Sydney Opera House.Its still a super-market in the wrong place.

I thank you for your time.

Yours Faithfully,
(name withheld)

Oatley Residents Association letters

2005-07-18T09:08:00.000+10:00

Click on each page to enlarge
(click a second time for extra large)

Leader Articles

2005-07-13T11:25:00.000+10:00

Leader: 23 August 2005

Click on each page to enlarge
(click a second time for extra large)

Leader 25 Aug05....... Leader 8 Sept 05

Oatley West Neighbourhood

2005-06-30T12:38:00.000+10:00

Oatley West Neighbourhood shops - Not an appropriate location for Coles supermarket

WHAT ELSE YOU CAN DO TO PROTECT OATLEY

2005-06-20T00:04:00.000+10:00

There are a number of other things you could do to help:

1. WRITE: Keep the letters and emails flowing to both Coles and media outlets. Write to the Leader, to The Sydney Morning Herald or The Daily Telegraph. We need to attract as much attention to the issue as possible.

2. CALL: Phone in to talk back radio to raise the issue. Look for any kind of lead in – a discussion about supermarkets, a story about overdevelopment, chat about big corporations squeezing out the little guys, etc.

3. NETWORK: Do you know anyone in a senior position in Coles? Do you know someone with expertise who might be able to advise on the issue?

Or maybe a contact in the media to give the issue some air?
Expertise in law, traffic management, web design/management, journalism

4. BOYCOTT: Boycott Coles supermarkets and other Coles businesses (Target, Kmart, Officeworks, Liquorland, Vintage Cellars).

5. SUPPORT: Continue to shop at local businesses and encourage others to do so.

6. DONATE: Support the campaign against Coles with a donation of time or money. There are plenty of ways to help out, so just call one of the group.

7. BE VISIBLE: Keep the campaign visible with banners/signs on your house or letterbox, a sign in your car window, fairy lights on your house, a T-shirt with message.

Letter from wife of former Federal Minister

2005-06-08T23:35:00.000+10:00

Letters to Newspapers

2005-06-07T23:21:00.000+10:00

17 July 2005

The Editor, Leader,
Box 1110 Rockdale 2216
amartinez@mail.fairfax.com.au

Dear Sir or Madam,

Your headline of Oatley Outrage certainly caught our mood over the proposed nasty development in our community. Our outrage increased on learning of the claim by the developer that he had consulted and listened to the community. The 1400 signatures against his proposal and the 400 objectors attending the Council hearing obviously sent a message that he does not want to hear.

It is clear that this development is neither needed nor wanted. Were it to go ahead it would destroy two communities of Oatley and West Oatley and a number of small businesses would be forced to go elsewhere or go broke. We can only hope that the determination to boycott any supermarket that is built will be sustained for long enough to show how just how misplaced was this absurd proposal.

The sneering remark of the so called Land and Environment that its decision would change [that is destroy] the village atmosphere indicates the real goal of that court. Destroying villages is considered criminal in some circles.

Yours sincerely
John Davoren and Judith Malcolm

Boycott Coles Myer Businesses

2005-06-06T20:17:00.000+10:00

Coles Supermarkets Shopfast

Bi-Lo Megamart

Target Kmart

Office Works Harris Technology

Liquorland Vintage Cellars Theo's Liquor (NSW)

Why is this development wrong

2005-06-06T19:46:00.000+10:00

The residents of Oatley are fighting the proposal to build a regional Coles supermarket in a quiet neighbourhood shopping area.

Summary of proposal
11 x 2 bedroom houses over two levels to be located above retail level.

5 office spaces with a combined floor area 361 sq metres

Café located on the mezzanine level area 134 sq metres

Supermarket operated by Coles area 2182 sqmetres

The site currently comprises four single dwelling houses, with a frontage of aprox. 70 metres, a depth of 40 metres giving an area of 2084 square metres. The site is within a small retail/commercial with residential uses located above. To the North and South are residential properties generally consisting of single dwelling houses.

Environmental concerns

Excavation of two and half storeys will be required to provide the two basement car parking levels and supermarket. This would keep the developmment within a two story height limit.

The site is adjacent to Myles Dunphy reserve. Significant excavation of soil and rock will have an impact on drainage into this sensitive mangrove area protected by the Foreshore Protection Act.

A significant landmark tree located near the Mulga Road frontage will also be lost due to this development.

Traffic
* Access for supply trucks is through residential streets.

* Supply truck entry and exit to loading dock is only via Mulga Rd which will cause congestion on collector road for Oatley West.

* Safety issues for pedestrian and vehicular traffic.

* Use of turntable in loading dock- turntables at other sites not used in practice, with trucks reverse into delivery bay.

* No designated truck waiting area for when loading dock occupied.

Neighbourhood Character

* Height and density of proposed development is out of character with small neighbourhood shopping village.

* Proposed development exploits typographical error on HCC LEP Amendment 38 to be rectified by amendment 60 currently in progress.

* Local business contribution to community/ part of community.

* Loss of income and closure of small neighbourhood shops:

– There are already 4 vacant shops in Oatley West.

– Experiences in Brighton-Le-Sands and Illawong when larger supermarkets move into the area have been detramental to the small business.

* Close proximity of the site to other Coles supermarkets – there are 3 others within a 10 minute drive. Hurstville Coles is 3,115sqm
Roselands Coles is 4,441sqm
Riverwood is Coles 2,271sqm

Oatley West Coles will be 2182sqm
Do we need this much retail space in such close proximity?

History of Development & Planning Instruments

2005-06-06T09:40:00.000+10:00

1995 - 1000 Residents through a petition protested against a proposal for a 4 storey development of 54 home units and one shop. Hurstville City Council refused this proposal. Oatley Residents then tried to have a two storey limit included in the controls.

1999 - After many delays the Minister advised that the two storey limit could not be approved until Council agreed to build more home units throughout Hurstville.

May 2000 - Following further representations by the Oatley Residents Association and strong representations by Kevin Greene the Minister approved LEP Amendment No 13 for a two storey limit for the 3 (a) zone in Peakhurst ward only.

September 2000 - the Minister approved LEP Amendment 23 for a two storey limit for the 3 (a) zone in Penshurst and Hurstville wards. This amendment was subsequently ruled to be ineffective on 17/6/02 because the notice of the intention had not been advertised correctly in the Leader.

August 2002 - the Minister approved LEP Amendment 38 along the same lines as Amendment 23. However in doing so the two storey height limit for the 3 (a) zone in Peakhurst ward was inadvertently removed from the LEP.

16 December 2003 – Renaldo Gaiety meets with 32 Oatley Residents Association at Oatley Bowling Club. At this meeting discussions are about 12 units and trying to preserve the tree.

12 January 2004 – Mr. Gaiety meets with 43 Oatley residents in church hall, Gungah Bay Road. A floor plan is presented with one large retail area of 1000sq metres. Residents are certain and vocal in rejecting a supermarket.

12 July 2004 – Renaldo Plus 3 Pty Ltd lodges DA 20040454 for demolition of existing dwelling houses and construction of a mixed use development which included a supermarket, with basement parking. No mention of “Coles” in Renaldo’s actual DA though the supermarket is referred to as “Coles supermarket” in plans

8 December 2004 – HCC’s Development Assessment Committee meeting at which Council staff presented their report, recommending approval of DA., according to existing planning instruments. Council’s Traffic Engineer did NOT refer DA to the RTA, or Hurstville’s Local Traffic Committee (LTC) as required by SEPP 11.

Councillors in presence of several hundred locals unanimously rejected DA.

13 January 2005 – draft Amendments 60 advertised in leader. Amendment 60 proposed to correct the mistake made in Amendment 38 by reinstating the two storey height limit for the 3 (a) zone in Peakhurst Ward. Amendment 66 proposes to change the name of Zone 3 (a) from General Business to Neighbourhood Business and generally make it clearer that zone 3 (a) was always intended for small neighbourhood shops.

22 March 2005 – first day of LEC hearing held on site at Mulga Rd. About 10 locals spoke to the commissioner. That evening Renaldo lodged an amended DA (dated about 10 days earlier apparently) with the LEC. This DA has not been on public exhibition so the community has not been consulted nor had the opportunity to lodge a submission of objection.

24 March 2005 - Draft Amendment 66 was advertised.

28 April 2005 – Hurstville’s LTC met for first time to discuss Mulga Rd DA that was lodged over 9 months before - and after the first day of LEC hearing.

2 and 3 June 2005 – days 2 and 3 of LEC heard in LEC rooms in Macquarie St. Some residents gave evidence. Renaldo had experts for town planning (Mr Andrew Darroch), traffic (Mr Graham Pindar), trees (Ms Catriona Mackenzie) and supermarkets (Coles Feasibility Manager, Mr Reginald Binding). There were a couple of court-appointed experts for town planning (Mr Gary Shiels), acoustic (Mr Barry Murray) and trees (Mr David Ford). HCC had none.

12 July 2005 – Renaldo Plus 3 Pty Limited v Hurstville City Council [2005] NSWLEC 315 judgment handed down.

26 August 2005 – ORAO met with Shadow Minister for Planning, Chris Hartcher to discuss the Planning Minister’s delay in signing off Amendments No. 60 and 66. That very afternoon, Sartor signed off Amendment 66.

9 September 2005 – LEP Amendment No 66 was gazetted. Change the name of Zone 3 (a) from General Business to Neighbourhood Business and generally make it clearer that zone 3 (a) was always intended for small neighbourhood shops. A size limit of 400sq metres retail area imposed.

14 October 2005 - Amendment 60 to LEP was gazetted. This will place a height restriction of the area to two storey height limit to include Peakhurst ward which had been inadverdently removed when amendment 38 was made.

17 & 18 October Appeal hearing at the Land and Environnment Court

1 November 2005 - Judgment - Development allowed.

Links to cases refered in LEC judgement

2005-06-06T08:31:00.000+10:00

http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/disp.pl/au/cases/nsw/NSWCA/2003/289.html?query=title%28terrace+tower+holdings+pty+limited+near+sutherland+shire+council+%282003%29+%29

http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lecjudgments/2000nswlec.nsf/c45212a2bef99be4ca256736001f37bd/36ed525749a42edbca25690d0014cdc5?OpenDocument

http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lecjudgments/2004nswlec.nsf/c45212a2bef99be4ca256736001f37bd/6cded24c1343b6d6ca256efa000fbd17?OpenDocument

Letter:Macklan Gordon Gridley JP

2005-06-03T22:39:00.000+10:00

Dear Mr Fletcher,

Subject: Proposed Coles Development 47-67 Mulga Road, Oatley West

Respectfully, if your PA does not pass this letter on for your attention, it could cost your Company dearly.

I am writing to respectfully request your Company to reconsider your interest in the above site for the following reasons:

1) While my wife and I live at Neutral Bay, we often visit one of my best friends who lives at Oatley. Further, we are always struck by the pleasant village atmosphere of the area, which as you would know is definitely not conducive to large developments, perhaps the worst type of such development being a supermarket.

2) I understand that none of the residents living in the area wish to have the nature of their peaceful suburb dramatically altered with an explosion of traffic, trucks and the scattering of trolleys far and wide and the necessary regular and noisy collection of same.

3) You are no doubt well aware that the roads and lanes in the area could not possibly handle the expected traffic demanded by a supermarket. Furthermore, widening and making suitable such roads for safe access and constant delivery of stock by heavy trucks, would, in itself, ruin the aforementioned village atmosphere.

4) Please Mr Fletcher, put yourself in these residents shoes for just one moment and imagine how they must be feeling..

I personally have been in a similar situation to yours before recently retiring as BP Australia's Property Manager. No matter where we intended to build there were always some local objections. But never did we proceed when the entire local population were outraged by our intentions. You and I both know that before seriously inspecting a site, models must be constructed detailing the amount of probable residential trade, and also, the expected passing trade, and traffic congestion etc. Even rain drainage capacity, night lighting for safety and security, blockage of sunlight, the proximity of traffic lights etc.

In my view, the location of your proposed Oatley West development is in a most unsuitable location having regard to all of the relevant aspects. Furthermore, it would overwhelmingly rely on residential trade.

Let me advise the obvious - that whenever BP Australia built under similar circumstances (little passing trade and extremely hostile residential objections), not only was the service station boycotted by most, but we found that even our surrounding BP sites some kilometres distant, suffered falling profits due presumably to a wide "backlash protest".

Further, windows were forever being smashed, trolleys stolen, and graffiti artists became most active on our walls (and they continue to do so - out of proportion with "normal" graffiti proliferation one would expect. As an example, have a look at the record of BP North Richmond (built about 8 years ago) and the surrounding service stations. The problems still continue today, and in hindsight, I am sure that BP would never have built at North Richmond with such evident local outrage.

Coles Myer Ltd generally enjoys a good corporate citizen image. Again I ask you Mr Fletcher, please do not put dollars in front of the general wellbeing of a beautiful and unique residential area such as Oatley. I am not suggesting that you should never build in anyone's backyard, but from my experience there are always thousands of other more suitable sites where local objections are scarce and sometimes even non existent, as your store could well generate jobs and greater profits for nearby retail businesses in a high density area.

However, apparently every local, as well as the local Council is fiercely opposed to your Oatley plans. Not just 30%, 50%, or even 90%, but closer perhaps to 99.9%.

In conclusion, I advise that my wife and I have always shopped at our closest supermarket - Coles, located in the Big Bear complex at Neutral Bay. If your disastrous and, I believe. most selfish Oatley development proceeds, we will be travelling the extra half kilometre to Woolworths Neutral Bay, and will never enter a Coles or Myers store again.

We will also encourage our friends and neighbours to do the same, after detailing your Company's complete disregard for the quality of Oatley residents lives. Of course this is not a threat, but what would you do in my shoes, and in those of the outraged Oatley residents?

Mr Fletcher, a company can be extremely successful, and have a heart as well. Thank you for your attention.

Yours faithfully,

Macklan Gordon Gridley JP
Neutral Bay

PS. Copies of this letter have been sent to Mr Gerry Masters, as well as all Sydney mainline newspapers and relevant local papers, and the newsrooms of all Sydney television and radio stations.