Tuesday, November 29, 2005  

Councillor Mark Coure Speech at Public Meeting

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

Monday, November 28, 2005  

Over 500 attend "No Coles in Oatley" Public Meeting

Thursday 24th November, 2005
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.

Saturday, November 26, 2005  

Shopping at Coles

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.

Thursday, November 17, 2005  

Urgent - PUBLIC MEETING 24 November

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 !!

Wednesday, November 16, 2005  

Media Directory

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
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

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

8 November "Court short on Supermarket" by Margaret Davis


Letters to "The Leader" November

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

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.


Thats the sound of the ball landing in your court.

See you at Woolies.
Tim Eaton

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.
Maintain the Rage,
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


Kym Coleman

1 http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/06/18/1055828386542.html
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

Sunday, November 13, 2005  

Reply from Coles after 10 Nov meeting

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

Friday, November 11, 2005  

No Coles Update

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.
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

Melissa O'Neill

Corporate Affaires Manager
CML Supermarkets
800 Toorak Road
Tooranga VIC 3146
(03) 98293486
400 587 232
ORAO is commissioning an internationally renowned pedestrian safety expert to prepare a report to present to Coles. Any financial assistance would be greatly appreciated.


* 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

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:

* 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?

* 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.

* 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.

* 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.

* 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.

Wednesday, November 02, 2005  

Maintain The Rage

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

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours? eXTReMe Tracker