AN EXTRAORDINARY Fairfield Council meeting held two days before Christmas to
help a developer meet his contractual deadlines has been condemned by
opponents and Fairfield Unity Party councillor Thang Ngo.
Cr Ngo said he was horrified to learn the council was giving preferential
treatment to a development application to build 66 townhouses on Hamilton
Rd, Fairfield West, after it was sent back for major redesign at the last
council meeting in December.
The proposal involves a mixed residential and commercial development
originally 73 units but reduced and also includes seven shops and parking.
The resolution from the meeting gave delegated authority to the council's
executive manager to make a decision on the DA before the end of January,
after an extended public consultation period.
But Cr Ngo said this resolution effectively helped the developer to meet his
deadline assistance that was not afforded to other residents who lodged DAs.
``The whole process is insulting to local residents, and residents should be
worried about protecting their rights from queue-jumping developers,'' Cr
Ngo said.
``It only cements my view that the Labor council caucus was putting
development . . . above residents' rights.
``I would not mind if the special council meeting was called to discuss
urgent issues in relation to library services, swimming pools or garbage
collection, but I was horrified to learn it was to help speed up the
approval of a DA for a developer.''
Opponent and project neighbour Ron Ellis said he was angry the objectors to
the proposal weren't personally informed of the special meeting and weren't
allowed to address councillors on the night.
``This council will bend over backwards to help the developer, but they
aren't interested in the residents,'' Mr Ellis said.
A former member of the Labor Party himself, Mr Ellis likened the Labor
councillors to their Liberal counterparts.
``I don't know what to call this council perhaps `the council for
developers'.''
Fairfield mayor Nick Lalich defended calling the meeting saying there was a
likelihood that unless the DA was determined by January 22, the developer
might not be able to buy the site and the development might not go ahead.
``This proposed development would have economic benefit for our city, so I
felt it was best to call the special council meeting and give the executive
manager the delegated authority to assess and make a decision on the
proposal now, rather than waiting for council to resume in February, when
the opportunity would have been lost,'' Cr Lalich said.
``Any community objections received will be taken into consideration and, of
course, all the usual processes and procedures for making a determination
will be adhered to.''