Peat Island and Mooney Mooney Lands

Be advised;

When considering any proposal by future DA applications to Central Coast Council, we must also take into account new DA considerations by Councils in NSW that have now a new consideration noted as 'Developer's Incentive Scheme'. This new initiative allows extra height space over and above hight restrictions in exchange for less ground covered by the development.

eg. an application for an apartment building to be constructed in a zoning for a maximum of four stories may cover the whole land site but if the building proposed application was to be revised under the 'Developer's Incentive Scheme' the application could be changed to an eight or ten story building covering less of the sight allowing more open space according to Council considerations.

This is beneficial to developers both financially and saleability as an eight or ten story high rise building is far more viable compared to a four story building covering more land space area.

Communities must keep this in mind when commenting on DA applications.

Planning Proposal RZ/58/2016 - Peat Island

 In regard to the matter, Planning Proposal RZ/58/2016 - Peat Island, tabled before Central Coast Council on Wednesday 22 March 2017, the majority of residents in Mooney Mooney are disappointed that the planning proposal to be tabled before Council at that meeting.

The amended proposal still ignores the comprehensive community consultations to date and still sights approximately 268 dwellings proposed comprising:

i. 82 low density
ii. 22 town houses
iii. 164 apartments

We are within a national park region with no visible sign of over development on the river such as apartments and townhouses so if these proposals are to be implemented, Mooney and Peat Island will be the stand out as high density, high negative visual impact and poor tourism impact with no regard to the scenic qualities of the region.

Mistake of renaming the Pacific Highway at Mooney Mooney

16 December 2016

Sorry I did not get back to regarding this issue. I confirm that is was an error by RMS to install the signs with OLD Pacific Highway. Plans are underway to have all the signs in the Moony Moony area rectified by Christmas. Thanks for your email

 Philip Oliver

Guidance and Delineation Manager

Network Sydney

8849 2960

9 November 2016

To; Mr Philip Oliver,

Manager Guidance and Delineation at Roads and Maritime.  

Dear Mr Oliver,

I'm writing to you in response to the email sent by Terry McSweeney regarding the correspondence to the Minister (Ref. 00196147) in relation to the re-naming of the Pacific Highway to OLD Pacific Highway in our area.

The response in the email letter states the renaming was in the interests of consistency from Calga south to the Hawkesbury River.

Can we suggest for the interest of consistency as a whole, the name Pacific Highway be retained in the Central Coast region as it is in all other regions the Pacific Highway runs through.

There is no 'New' Pacific Highway to necessitate a name change and the new highway sections are named accordingly, eg.M1 etc so any reason in this vain is seen as unnecessary.

As mentioned in our original correspondence, in our region there are residential properties and businesses that have not been consulted as to a street name change and also would like to retain their postal address as Pacific Highway and not OLD Pacific Highway.

The Pacific Highway has a history that is lost when the prefix of Old is added.

Please advise what other process we need to navigate to achieve this outcome.

With regards

Tony Lavidis

November 2016

NSW GOVERNMENT 

Transport for NSW 

Thank you for your correspondence to the Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight about the recent renaming of the Pacific Highway at Mooney Mooney. The Minister has asked me to respond on his behalf. I appreciate the reasons which prompted you to write and asked Roads and Maritime Services about the name change. I am advised the 'Old Pacific Highway' name previously took effect at CaIga. Roads and Maritime extended this designation south towards the Hawkesbury River in the interests of consistency. In response to your concerns about the impact on residents, Roads and Maritime will re evaluate this change. 
If you have any further questions, Mr Philip Oliver, Manager Guidance and Delineation at Roads and Maritime, would be pleased to take your call on (02) 8849 2960. I hope this has been of assistance. 
Yours sincerely 
Terry M Sweeney Principal Manager, Ministerial & Government Services Customer Relations & Government Services 
Transport for NSW 18 Lee Street, Chippendale NSW 2008 I PO Box K659, Haymarket NSW 1240 Tel: 8202 2200 I Fax: 8202 2209 I transportnsw.goy.au I ABN 18 804 239 602 

Derelict Oyster leases Mooney Mooney Creek

August 2020

Dear Minister Adam Marshall,

For some years now, our action group has been writing to the Department of Fisheries Manager Steve McOrrie in relation to old oyster lease sites at Mooney Mooney on the Hawkesbury River.

The old lease sites were to be to be completely cleared some years ago but some sections have been left and are a danger to boats and people using water craft in the area.

I personally went out with the local fisheries inspector and we covered where these dangerous unmarked lease areas were in early 2019.

To date nothing has been done to, if not remove the remaining lease material from the mentioned cleared site, then at least have the area marked as a water hazard so the boating public do not endanger themselves when enjoying the Hawkesbury Waterways.

 Our resident action group and the local Tourism businesses would like this matter resolved as soon as possible, thank you

January 2020

Response from Adam Marshall MP

January 2021

Thank you for the reply Minister Marshall,

We, the residents of the Hawkesbury River and especially at Mooney Mooney have a number of concerns with the statements in your letter.

It is unfortunate that the fisheries policy makers and those elected, follow a format to avoid the matters raised with relayed misinformation.

 The statement that "The Government does not support the removal of low reef oyster structures over historical oyster lease cultivation sites due to environmental services they provide" is excusing the lack of effort from the department toward clearing old oyster lease site materials.

 The derelict material left and the resulting mudflats formed over old oyster lease sites have no more environmental service than any of the surrounding clear mud flat areas and the site would significantly benefit from the removal of old lease material enabling better water flows to flush out the siltation caused.

 In years past, The Mooney Action Group worked with past ministers such as Eddie Obeid to remove a number of old lease site areas in the Mooney Mooney Creek area which has made significant improvements to water flows in the immediate area.

In more recent years the NSW State Government and Federal Government funded a mass clean up of old lease sites due to the effects of the QX Virus so a statement such as the one mentioned is not in line with previous actions from Governments and the Department's research.

 Old lease materials left to rot have harboured viruses such as QX and affected the oyster industry on the Hawkesbury River as it has in other oyster growing areas such as Georges River.

Reasons for inaction by the department and relayed to an elected member should always be credible which in these statements are lacking.

May 2018

This site may remain viable according to Dep. of Primary Industries but hopefully if re-established will not fall into the neglect that it has been for many years.

The inspectors based in Newcastle has gone through the process of allowing ample time that amounted to years, for the lease holder to rectify issues raised and a number of excuses for delays have been forthcoming such as illness, being overseas, financial hardship due to QX virus to name a few and this has dragged out to process but with persistence of contacting the Department regularly, the matter seems to have been resolved.

This oyster farmer is a lease holder based in the Wallis Lake area on the NSW Mid North Coast with a few lease sites on the Hawkesbury River. One site that he still holds is in Big Bay and again, issues of poor lease site boundary markings remains.

November 2017

To date, nothing has happened to clean up this lease and the department remains defensive of the issue. The lease has a current lease term until 2026 and though the lease has been unused and derelict since 1999, the department states that 'is not classed as derelict'.

It is considered an inappropriate response as this lease holder's main business is based in Forster and his oyster leases are located at Wallis Lake. No hardships are evident in that region for this business.

Phone calls and written correspondence continue and the matter remains current.

February 2017

From: Jennifer Davis [mailto:jennifer.davis@dpi.nsw.gov.au]
Sent: Saturday, 11 February 2017 5:45 PM
To: Tony Lavidis
Cc: Christopher Clarke; Ben Travis; Stephen Mcorrie
Subject: Oyster Lease 79/090- Mooney Mooney

 Thank you for contacting myself, Ben Travis, aquaculture unit and Chris Clarke regarding oyster lease 79/090 at Mooney Mooney.  My apologies I was unable to respond to your enquiry before now due to being on leave.

 Since our last discussion regarding this lease back in May 2016 our department conducted an internal workshop regarding the compliance of various oyster leases at the Central Coast and Hawkesbury River. One of the outcomes of that workshop was to allow farmers in the Hawkesbury River a reprieve from lease clean up responsibilities until 2018. This resolution was due to the prolonged financial difficulties that the oyster farming industry has suffered as a result of multiple disease outbreaks and other factors over recent years.

 In relation to lease 79/090 being a navigational and environmental hazard, which is an issue you have raised previously, after consulting with Roads and Maritime services in 2015, they reported back that the channel markers nearby were adequate to direct boating traffic around the lease. 

 In relation, to signage and marking, the lease is required to be clearly marked as set out in the Oyster Industry Sustainable Aquaculture Strategy (OISAS), a copy of which I sent to you in 2015. This strategy was again updated in 2016 and I have attached an updated copy to this email for your reference. I have also attached a map of the oyster leases in the Hawkesbury River. This map shows that the lease in question is in fact designated as a Priority Oyster Aquaculture Area (POAA). As previously advised, the lease has a current lease term until 2026 and is not classed as derelict. There are no intentions to remove the lease at present.

 The last inspection of lease 79/090 was carried out in April 2016 and at this time required one corner post and 2 signs. A compliance letter was sent to the permit holder shortly after this inspection, directing them to mark the lease. I have called the permit holder to follow up on signage.

 Please see below a record of our previous correspondence regarding this matter. At present, the lease is compliant to our standing policies. If you have any further new enquiries or complaints regarding these policies, you may contact me again or contact the aquaculture policy unit at Port Stephens on 02 4982 1232.

 regards

 Jennifer

Jennifer Davis | District Fisheries Officer | Central Coast

NSW Department of Primary Industries

April 2016

From: Jennifer Davis [mailto:jennifer.davis@dpi.nsw.gov.au]
Sent: Wednesday, 13 April 2016 2:52 PM
Cc: Christopher Clarke; Jai Settree; Katie Sachs; Aquaculture Administration
Subject: Re: Oyster Lease 79-090 Mooney Mooney

 Thanks for getting in touch regarding this lease. I can let you know that the work plan recently expired (ending March 2016). I recently inspected the lease (last Wednesday 6th April) on the lowest of tides, to ascertain the current condition. Compliance action is being undertaken for failing to comply with the agreed work plan. Compliance action now will consist of interviewing the farmer and issue of fines where appropriate. Policy then allows the farmer another chance to clean up the lease. If the farmer fails again, the department can clean the lease up and pursue costs from the farmer.

 regards

 Jennifer

 Jennifer Davis | District Fisheries Officer

Central Coast Fisheries Compliance

November 2015

From: Jennifer Davis [mailto:jennifer.davis@dpi.nsw.gov.au]
Sent: Friday, 13 November 2015 12:41 PM
Cc: Christopher Clarke; Jai Settree; Katie Sachs; Aquaculture Administration
Subject: Re: Oyster Lease 79-090 Mooney Mooney

Thank you for getting in touch with us regarding this lease. I have looked at the files and note that the lease is currently on a work program for cleanup by March 2016.

I have phoned the oyster farmer and he is currently overseas and not due to return until mid December. A family member indicated that cleanup work has been delayed over the last 3 months due to ill health.

I will make contact with the farmer when he returns in December to get an indication of when they will get the work completed.

regards

Jenny

January 2015

After years of complaints derelict oyster leases on the Hawkesbury remain.

The Department of Primary Industries Fisheries Department have been contacted and notified that lease 79-090 at Mooney Mooney Creek still remains unused and derelict. 

The Lease has been assessed by a Fisheries Officer from the Central Coast. 

This officer inspected the lease on Wed 28/01/2014 together with the leaseholder (oyster farmer).

The response from Jennifer Davies 'District Fisheries Officer' is as follows;

Inspection results:

The lease is not presently being used for cultivation

The lease has boundary markers in accordance with our regulations which consists of corner posts with signs and boundary markers spaced at 50 m intervals. 

There are numerous posts/ farming infrastructure within the lease area . Some parts of this are broken and there is some over catch to be removed (oysters growing on the posts unintentionally).

Background information:

There is an active lease term of 15 years on this lease.

NSW Fisheries Compliance issued a clean-up notice on this lease 6 months ago. The farmer then entered into an agreed work plan. The leaseholder has been carrying out extensive repairs/ cleanup of 3 other leases in the Hawkesbury River over the last 5 months. NSW Fisheries Compliance is working with the farmer to achieve the best possible outcomes across all the leased areas belonging to this farmer.

It is not uncommon for farmers to leave posts in the leased area during periods when farming is not ongoing. This practice is acceptable however if the posts become rotten or broken they must be removed, due to aesthetics and also due to any dangers from material becoming loose.

As I am sure you are aware, the oyster farming industry in the Hawkesbury River was adversely affected by the outbreak of both QX disease in 2004 and Pacific Oyster Mortality Syndrome in 2013. Both of these major events led to a near collapse of the local oyster farming industry with only a few farmers remaining. Those that do remain, are working to re-mediate untidy leases on much reduced or no incomes. Most farmers lost all their growing oysters which take years to farm to market size. This lease has been in existence since 1979 and I note that over the years the lease has been in both tidy and untidy states. At present the lease is not too bad and the farmer is working toward further improvement together with his other leased areas. 

I also note concerns regarding navigation. In terms of our marking requirements, the lease is compliant. I have however made contact with NSW Roads and Maritime Services to discuss the current placement of the starboard channel marker, which in our opinion would be better placed near the north eastern extremity of the oyster lease. An RMS Boating Officer is best placed to make that assessment however, and they are investigating whether it would be necessary to mark the area differently.

Kind Regards

Jennifer

Jennifer Davis | District Fisheries Officer

Central Coast Fisheries Compliance