18 October 2012

CHILDREN! not factories [Rumblings at Oaks Estate]

18 October 2012 | OEPA

Would you feel good about industrial factories been built on contaminated land in your suburb – and across the road from a childrens playground. Well it seems to be happening in the village of Oaks Estate.

A recent unopposed decision by Queanbeyan City Council (QCC) has meant just that.

As part of a recent LEP process, Railcorp through the QCC sought to have contaminated land rezoned to industrial use. The land area while ‘technically’ in NSW – is literally on Canberra’s border – fronts Railway St (ACT) and can only be accessed and serviced by driving heavy commerical vehicles through the village of Oaks Estate, which is in the ACT.

The residents of Oaks Estate say no to this and have sought assistance – but little support given by the ACT government to date.

There is a cross border MOU in place to allegedly manage ACT/Queanbeyan infrastructure issues and the sharing of…however been told that Queanbeyan has at the expense of ACT residents the right to determine an outcome which is only to their social and economic benefit…just does not stack up.

The community of Oaks Estate wants an outcome that is to the ACT’s benefit also.

We want a safe place for our children to play – not be polluted.

Help us say no!

Join the conversation

All Comments

All Comments
Website Comments
Facebook Comments

LatestOldest

OEPA7:24 am 21 Oct 12

In the spirit of riotact …as highlighted below and as oft repeated the issue is about ill considered planning at best…

chainsaw said :

So far, nobody has commented on the other side of what Rail Corp is doing with their rezoning. There is quite a lot of land involved but the large area on the Queanbeyan side of the railway tracks is zoned for recreational use. Queanbeyan Council supports this, to buffer the station, a heritage building, from high density residential development. But the small and contaminated part nearest to Oaks Estate, with lousy access for trucks, is to be used for light industry…

Of course, that area is too small to allow for effective buffering between industry and (ACT) housing. But that’s OK, isn’t it? Council says that people in Oaks Estate should be grateful that Rail Corp doesn’t build another fuel terminal, or worse, on the land. For railway use, of course. Really? The rail system locally is going backwards year by year, and needs less infrastructure accordingly. That is why Rail Corp were willing to rezone such a big area of land – it’s just coincidence (isn’t it?) that the icky stuff gets served up as close as possible to the ACT. Yes, just coincidence, of course it is…

And where was the ACT Government while all this was going on? Busy debating the fine points of buffering between Hume and Tralee, that’s where.

chainsaw3:40 pm 20 Oct 12

So far, nobody has commented on the other side of what Rail Corp is doing with their rezoning. There is quite a lot of land involved but the large area on the Queanbeyan side of the railway tracks is zoned for recreational use. Queanbeyan Council supports this, to buffer the station, a heritage building, from high density residential development. But the small and contaminated part nearest to Oaks Estate, with lousy access for trucks, is to be used for light industry…

Of course, that area is too small to allow for effective buffering between industry and (ACT) housing. But that’s OK, isn’t it? Council says that people in Oaks Estate should be grateful that Rail Corp doesn’t build another fuel terminal, or worse, on the land. For railway use, of course. Really? The rail system locally is going backwards year by year, and needs less infrastructure accordingly. That is why Rail Corp were willing to rezone such a big area of land – it’s just coincidence (isn’t it?) that the icky stuff gets served up as close as possible to the ACT. Yes, just coincidence, of course it is…

And where was the ACT Government while all this was going on? Busy debating the fine points of buffering between Hume and Tralee, that’s where.

milkman11:35 pm 19 Oct 12

In the spirit of RiotACT arguments, I’d like to point out that Queanbeyan was there well before Oak’s Estate.

Woody Mann-Caruso6:14 pm 19 Oct 12

OEPA, can you get out? If you privately own, is selling an option? If you are a govvie tenant, I would contact Housing ACT ASAP about a swap or transfer.

Or you could say you’re homeless, and move in next door to miz!

OEPA5:14 pm 19 Oct 12

watto23 said :

The land is already contaminated. Its far better to build industrial use facilities on contaminated land. Sorry, but builkding anything else would be wreckless and careless. Especially when people start reporting health issues of their children who were using some community facility built on contaminated land.

Your post uses a lot of clkiches to try and throw emotion into something. The only person who agrees, has a history of nimbyism on RiotACT also.

Yes i’m all for creating a harmonious community with ties between the ACT and Queanbeyan. Why don’t you rally the government for a safe place for the children to play in in Oaks Estate? much more proactive and less abrasive.

I believe Oaks Estate residents do have a place for children and others to recreate – in fact this was the recent recipient of a major upgrade – the irony is that Mayor Overall and the Chief Minister Katy Gallagher presided over this opening.

Why should communities always be subjected to corporate expediency and profit over a balanced outcome? Saying it is bad and thus a planning process can be used to worsen a situation in 2012 is no longer that valid nor an easy justification.

But if QCC wish to rezone – provide appropriate buffers that recognise the NSW/ACT border, and landscape treatments – importantly provide access to this land from the NSW side of the border.

If this is the final planning outcome, and I hear much recently said by Mr Papps about improving the planning process – it will undo close to 25 years of studies, consultation and planning.

We welcome a productive cross border dialogue on this and invite both QCC and ACT Government to work in the spirit of the MoU, and meet with the residents of Oaks Estate to formally discuss this.

watto234:01 pm 19 Oct 12

The land is already contaminated. Its far better to build industrial use facilities on contaminated land. Sorry, but builkding anything else would be wreckless and careless. Especially when people start reporting health issues of their children who were using some community facility built on contaminated land.

Your post uses a lot of clkiches to try and throw emotion into something. The only person who agrees, has a history of nimbyism on RiotACT also.

Yes i’m all for creating a harmonious community with ties between the ACT and Queanbeyan. Why don’t you rally the government for a safe place for the children to play in in Oaks Estate? much more proactive and less abrasive.

Keijidosha3:13 pm 19 Oct 12

I spent my youth in a house opposite a light industrial area that included a rail line and fuel/gas depots. Apart from some noise and my cat being hit by a truck it was a completely uneventful place to live, and I didn’t end up with any short/long term health issues.

That being said I can understand why a community would want to avoid industry taking root in a residential area, but unfortunately for Oaks Estate that horse bolted long ago.

miz1:42 pm 19 Oct 12

I can see why you all want to stay in your existing community – you have an admirable sense of community spirit, a value which is unfortunately seriously undervalued these days (as there is no $$$ attached to that important value). Such places are often surprisingly terrific to live in. I only say ‘surprisingly’ because a lot of Canberrans pigeon-hole Oaks Estate as an undesirable place to live.

It would have been better if the land were to be decontaminated and used for community purposes. I am guessing it is contaminated from its former use by the railways – surely it is not so hard to decontaminate if this is the case – plenty of examples in Pyrmont, Ultimo (etc) in Sydney.

I see from the election guide thingy that you are in the Molonglo electorate. I would be getting MLA’s views now, and then writing to (emailing, petitioning) successful MLAs once the election is over, asking that you can be involved in what goes eventually happens to that land. Think about how you might be happy to compromise. Examples of this are, eg you might be OK with a shop or two, a child care centre, and single storey offices, but don’t want after hours traffic, noisy industry, multi-storey, etc etc.

I wish you the best.

Deref11:59 am 19 Oct 12

I wish you luck, OEPA, but if it comes down to Issue X and profit, profit will win every time.

Although, yeah, I’d be more concerned about getting rid of the contamination first.

aussielyn11:56 am 19 Oct 12

The next chief minister should take a lesson from the late Jim Fraser who worked for the benefit of the residents. Having a street that has one side ACT and the other NSW with two different planning rules is a recipe for a disaster. The Oaks Estate master plan indicates traffic calming on Railway St. Will this be safe access for the trucks coming and going from the warehouses in the light industry zoned site?
History is repeating itself as has been the fight for water, sewerage, electricity, and other municipal services. In the 1920s, OEPA nimbys had the nerve to want more than one half inch water tap for the whole settlement! Residents have always been left out in the battles between QCC and the ACT.
If sanity is to prevail, talks should commence between QCC, ACT, Railcorp and OEPA to sort out a way forward. There are steps for dispute resolution in MOU between the ACT and NSW.

OEPA10:19 pm 18 Oct 12

c_c you need a geography lesson there is no tannery within the village of oaks estate

c_c said :

The original poster must be a bit thick. Oakes Estate has had small industry forever, including a leather tanning operation (now closed I think) which used some of the most toxic chemicals you could expect to be exposed to in the region.

Mr danger mouse lets face it I think you did say fuel dump and only you mentioned arts centre. And I like appropriate development.

DangerMouse said :

Ok Opea now you are just getting silly… You say it’s poor planning they did not decide to remediate the toxic land in order to build a cultural centre? Wtf? There is lots of vacant land that has never been contaminated that could be used instead. Why on earth would you put an arts centre on an old railway site?

Let’s face it, you just hate any kind of development that is not some hemp tent arts centre.

I did not say there was a fuel dump, I said the spot had a fuel depot ie the gas depot. Gas is stilla kind of fuel right?

I stand by my post that this article is deceptive… Much like the ACT liberals tactic of saying rates will triple under labor. Did opea provide campaigning advice??

To be clear. Oaks Estate residents seek an appropriate outcome that reflects the intention and spirit of the cross border MOU. So that would be about balanced objectives supporting both Queanbeyan and Oaks Estate residents. An outcome that supports the ACT funded masterplan and heritage study. That does not result in further inappropriate development and yes we would want RailCorp to show good governance and remediate the land – the LEP allows them to avoid this. I would believe that Queanbeyan residents and their children who use the rail corridor on the Henderson Rd to recreate, play and grow food would also like the laureate of knowing that the land is fit for purpose and not subject to future industrial development.

Remember the land discussed is NSW but only accessible and only serviced by using the village of Oaks Estate as its thoroughfare.

It seems more about government indifference and corporate interest and profit over valuing community needs.

OEPA5:45 pm 18 Oct 12

Im sorry but the issue is to do with short sighted and poor planning practices. For instance QCC could have shown a measure of creativity and sought Railcorp to remediate the land to a much higher standard that surely would of opened up the scope for development here. But no…. What about lets say for creative cultural uses? But no…And why does QCC want to see the potential for their recently pronounced Heritage precinct centred around the Railway Station to be eroded by this decision…

But why should Oaks Estate, that is after 25 years having a masterplan/heritage study completed, be subjected to a poor planning decision from a local government in a different state?

And personally, I do not recall QCC ever consulting with Oaks Estate residents given they will be the the community impacted by this poor planning decision and not NSW residents – so how does the MOU cover this issue?

In fact the plans shown in the LEP submission had a legend to interpret the plans placed exactly over where Oaks Estate is. Not nimbyism – grossly ill considered.

And no there is nothing misrepresented – if RailCorp was able to find a current economic use for it would they not already – I understand (happy to be corrected), that under current arrangement only businesses associated with RailCorp can operate – There is no fuel dump, but a domestic scale gas depot and a temporary fence business operating from an older rail siding building.

You could argue that converting the land to a lesser industrial zoning is an easy out for RailCorp and gives a much greater scope to use this land area inappropriately, for a wide range of industrial acitvities – so the impacts for the children of Oaks Estate are significant.

Given the area is not currently over developed and in little in use, the land is contaminated they have sought and been granted an easy out at the expense of a community and their children.

Potential for development? Sorry, but do you think boutique commercial developments, retail and child care centres will operate here? Beside a ‘fuel dump’ that by your admission cannot be closed down due to a preexisting use. If only your vision of the world was so clear cut. Please.

Overscaled factories (9.000m high), cheaply built will be the order of the day!

Please say no to poor planning and help our children.

View more conversations

Featured Businesses

Community Club

Canberra Southern Cross Club

We're proud to give you a place where friends and family can come together for good food and great entertainment.

Find out more

Electricians

True Connection Electrical

Since 2014, True Connection Electrical have been servicing residential and small commercial clients with reliable, trustworthy and top-quality electrical work.

Find out more

Mortgage Brokers

Clarity Home Loans

A passionate team of Canberrans helping other Canberrans secure their home loans. No frills, no commissions, no brainer.

Find out more

Insurance Brokers

allinsure

Allinsure has been a trusted insurance advisory to thousands of Australian business owners for almost 20 years.

Find out more

Lawyers

MV Law

Through a spirit of entrepreneurialism, collaboration, and future-forward thinking, MV Law have earned an industry-leading reputation.

Find out more

Lawyers

BDN Lawyers

BDN has provided legal services to to Canberra, Queanbeyan and the region for over 160 years.

Find out more

Lawyers

Kamy Saeedi Law

When you need a criminal or commercial lawyer, you don’t want to take any chances. You want someone in your corner that you can trust like your life depends on it - because it does.

Find out more