Eagle Avenue Hawks Nest NSW 2324

DA2022/0220 Eagle Avenue, Hawks Nest.

Subdivision of 1 lot into 16 Torrens Title residential lots and 10 Community Title residential lots.

There is not much information to have your say regarding this subdivision, only the above mentioned, and what the developer has advertised through the real-estate.

I feel there could be issues with:

Size of the blocks they should be based on current sizes in town – they seem too small to accommodate green spaces, families and their toys (boats, jetskis, etc).

Access road to blocks (based on developers advertisement). Not enough room for parking cars, access for rubbish removal trucks etc.

Not all trees should be removed, too much of this goes on with mass development.
Currently Flying foxes are inhabiting the trees on this block of land, will they be relocated? They could move to neighbouring properties?

No amalgamation of blocks of land eg. No unit blocks, we need family homes suitable for Hawks Nest peoples lifestyle.

I agree, there is insufficient information available to make an informed comment. My strong concerns include the environmental impact of the proposed works, whether there is sufficient wildlife corridors and also consideration of the koala population. Also since the sites are situated in a area influenced by tidal processes and substantial attention should be paid to this impact, drainage and protection of the mangrove areas and fish and aquatic ecosystem nursery.

I would not like Eagle Ave to be developed. The wooded area ,as it stands now, is home to our koala population, together with flying foxes, and a natural haven for different varieties of bird life. I would have thought that, with koalas becoming an endangered species ,that their sanctuary would be more important than ever, to be kept in its natural state to keep them safe and protected. I find it very sad that the beauty and tranquility of Hawks Nest is poised to become just another concrete jungle.

Please consider my opinions, I would like our area to remain just as it is.

DA 2022/0220
I object to the Eagle Ave Development in Hawks Nest
There needs to be more information made available to the public, this is and important development for the local animals and people.
The ENDANGERED KOALA population needs this area, as does the Flying Fox and other local wildlife.
This land is currently used by the local wildlife and ENDANGERED KOALA as a home and wildlife corridor so local wildlife can move around safely in Hawks Nest.
The on street parking and garbage truck access issues need to be taken in to consideration.
Also public and resident access, one way in and out of this development is not safe for the public and future residents.

Hi all
As a younger person trying desperately to buy into a market that’s over inflated and having the hopes off one day living at hawks nest this development gives us the opportunity to do so, it’s not all about money and greed when I comes to these developments it gives people an opportunity that wouldn't otherwise.
So please consider that aspect while processing the application

I agree that there is too little information re the Eagle Avenue development. But on the basis of there being 26 units in total, the development is clearly too dense, and would mean loss of greenspace and native fauna.

It is very disheartening to think that affordability and community title properties can only be achieved at the cost of degrading the environment. We need to do better!

Driving over the singing bridge into Hawks Nest is a beautiful tranquil sight - to see that area over developed would be terrible. Let’s keep the green spaces - the endangered Koala corridors and the flying foxes. Way too many ‘houses/units’ for that block of land. There is a reason it was zoned the way it currently is initially. Sure HN needs more housing but please don’t over develop it and make it like all the over over developed towns on our beautiful coast.

I wish to object to the subdivision DA 2022/0220 of the Eagle Ave precinct on the following grounds:
* This is one of the few pockets of remnant bush in the Hawks Nest village. It may not be all native bush but is still an important refuge for many types of wildlife including endangered koalas and grey headed flying foxes.
* The blocks are too small. No room for green space around the built homes.
* This was a wildlife corridor. Fencing around house blocks will prevent animal egress to any surviving pockets of bush.
* I have seen conflicting maps of the development. One shows a dead end access road. The other shows a road that exits onto Kingfisher Ave. This second road is drawn on what is E2 zoned land which should not be allowed.
* If a road from the development exits on to Kingfisher Ave on the bend indicated, it will be a very dangerous intersection.
* Part of the charm of Hawks Nest is driving over the bridge into a bush corridor so you don’t feel you are in the middle of suburbia. This is an attraction to holiday makers and residents which will be lost if all you can see from the bridge is a sea of single and double storey roofs.

I do not wish eagle avenue to be developed, as I have stated previously, however
in the interest of residents safety I request that the bracken fern be slashed to enable full view of oncoming traffic coming around the bend from Pelican avenue.Reversing out of our driveways is very dangerous because cars coming around the bend do not have any vision of what is ahead. We have had two “near misses” whilst reversing onto eagle avenue from our driveway, as oncoming traffic is unable to see.

DA2022/0220 Eagle avenue, Hawks Nest
We totally object to this development and we do not consent to having a T intersecting directly opposite our home that would cause car head lights shining directly into our bedrooms at night. Road 03 as labelled on page 5 of the Engineering Plan is totally unacceptable and unnecessary when there is already a proposed access Road off Pelican Avenue labelled Driveway 1, that would not have any detrimental effect such as headlights shining into existing bedrooms. Blocks 113-116 merely need to be rotated and then this road is clearly not needed, if in FACT the land on the adjacent side is truly being given back to council as Koala habitat or this is just another misleading statement as it would appear to be no other reason that a road is needed here then for future development.
The roads or driveway 1 as it is labelled in the Engineering Plan (page5) is only 6m wide what a joke. Two large 4x4 cars would only just be able to pass. Not to mention if a car with a boat trailer was parked on the road or a Garbage truck was trying traverse the road. The block sizes of 450m2 are extremely small and DO NOT match the existing surrounding blocks. The blocks are that small there will be no room to accommodate boats and jet skis on the block itself and therefore they will be on the roadway/driveway as it is labelled again causing a significant problem to other road users.
.Not enough information is available and what information that is being provided is false and misleading, totally inaccurate and convoluted to say the least. On these grounds alone this application needs to be thrown out the door.
For example, at the beginning of the Statement of Environmental Effects (SOEE) 12-14 Moira Parade, this alone clearly does not refer to Eagle Avenue. So where is the Statement of Environmental Effects upon Eagle Avenue and the residents? Clearly there is not one and there have been no investigational studies undertaken, Strike one!!
Again, the application has clearly tried to mislead anyone reading it (local residents) with the fraudulent statement that “The subject site is split by Kingfisher Avenue”. From my understanding and observations Kingfisher Avenue ends at the corner/intersection of Ibis and Myall Street.(feel free to correct me if I am wrong). Therefore is clearly NOT split by Kingfisher Avenue, Strike two!!
Paragraph 2.3 of the Statement of Environmental Effects states that, “All future habitable rooms have a finished floor height above the 100yr ARI (1% AEP) event. Buildings and other structures are not considered to impede the flow of floodwaters or entrap debris in a 1% AEP event”. The land at present is extremely swampy and is a recognised and know flood zone that is BELOW the 1 in a year flood mark and frequently exposed to tidal inundation with king tides. Combine these King tides with stormwater runoff from these new houses would significantly “impede the flow of floodwaters or entrap debris in a 1% AEP event”, and increase the chances for serve water inundation to all existing residents of Eagle Avenue who are currently not supplied drainage facilities, strike 3!!
The prospective buyers of these properties should also be made aware of the FACT that insurance companies are now charging 10s of thousands of dollars or refusing to insure properties that are in the flood zones. If this FACT is not disclosed by the developer this should be considered as misleading advertising and fraud by attempting to obtain financial advantage by deception.
5.8.1 Erosion and Sediment Control
“The proposed works identify that there will be limited cut on the site (approximately 269 cubic metres) while approximately 18,000 cubic metres of fill will be required. Erosion and sediment controls for any stockpiles will also be required.”

Let it be known now, for and on the record that Mr Adrian Pannucio the CEO of MCC is vicariously liable for all approvals/actions that contribute to the loss or harm as a direct result of Any flood/water inundation damage caused to existing properties due to raising the level of the land and causing run off onto existing properties and preventing water from escaping to the river and will be held accountable.
Section 3 -Strategic and Statutory Planning Considerations
3.11 – The Commonwealth Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC) 1999. In conjunction with the Commonwealth Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation 2000, provide the basis for national environmental protection and conservation. The EPBC Act provides for the protection of matters of national environmental significance (MNES) and enhance the protection and management of natural and cultural places.
The EPBC requires Commonwealth approval for development which significantly impacts upon matters relating to National environmental significance. The nine matters of national environmental significance protected under the EPBC Act include 2 that are of significant importance being the
• Listed threatened species and ecological communities
• Migratory species
It is common knowledge now that Koalas and their habitat has gone from threatened to ENDANGERED species, while the Long-nosed Potoroo is listed as Vulnerable. Therefore where is the commonwealth approval?
The Grey Headed Flying Fox is a Nomadic species and frequents this location and are also listed as a threatened species.
We note “The EPBC Act is addressed in the Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (Appendix C)”
The Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (Appendix C) is also extremely misleading with regard to the so-called observations that were made of the flora and fauna and the provided legend to assess these observations, that does not correlate with what is within the list, warranting further scrutiny of the methods used and the integrity of the assessors.
We should be doing everything possible to prevent the further fragmentation of endangered species habitat.
7.3 Biodiversity Development Assessment Report
Highly Suitable Koala Habitat – Where 15% or greater of the total number of trees within any PCT are the regionally relevant species of those listed in Schedule 2 of the Koala SEPP 2021, the site meets the definition of highly suitable koala habitat.
As such, the presence of ‘highly suitable koala habitat’ and ‘Core Koala Habitat’ under the Koala SEPP 2021 is detailed below.
Presence of Highly Suitable Koala Habitat
Three (3) Koala use tree species listed under Schedule 2 of the Koala SEPP were identified within the Development Site, including Eucalyptus robusta (Swamp Mahogany), Eucalyptus pilularis (Blackbutt) and Melaleuca quinquenervia (Broad-leaved Paperbark). These species constitute over 15% of the total number of trees within the Vegetation Zones 1 and 3 only. As such, these vegetation zones within the Development Site constitute “highly suitable habitat” under the Koala SEPP 2021. Presence of Core Koala Habitat Evidence of koalas were recorded within the Study Area within areas to be retained although no evidence was found within the Development Site. Multiple recent records have been noted (<18 years old) within 2.5 km of the Study Area (North Coast KMA) was identified (DPIE 2021a). Considering the above, the vegetation within the Development Site meets the definition of ‘Core Koala Habitat’ under the Koala SEPP 2021. Impacts to Koala habitat under the Koala SEPP 2021 require the completion of a Koala Assessment Report (KAR). This is provided in Appendix E
5.5.6 What are the offset required for impacts to native vegetation and threatened species?
5.5.6.3 “Considering the above, the vegetation within the development site meets the definition of ‘Core Koala Habitat’ under the Koala SEPP 2021. Impacts to Koala habitat under the Koala SEPP 2021 require the completion of a Koala Assessment Report (KAR). This is provided in Appendix E of the BDAR.”
As noted above the development site is highly suitable and core Koala habitat, koalas are now an endangered species, and it is paramount that this corridor of land is protected for the future survival of the Koala population within Hawks Nest. There is also a significant colony of flying foxes that call this area home as well.
There are also dozens of other threatened/endangered flora and fauna that are mentioned but not observed within the report. Just because they were not observed does not mean that they do not inhabit the area.
We also note that this land was unlawfully cleared and not rehabilitated as it was meant to be. Council has failed their duty of care by not ensuring this land was rehabilitated by the previous owner. The FACT that the land has been disturbed and contains weeds and non-native trees is noted and frequently mentioned throughout the SOEE Flora and Fauna section 5.5. As council has failed its duty of care lets hope they do not fail the Flora, Fauna and residents again.
No Assured Value. No Liability. No Errors and
Omissions Accepted. All Rights Reserved