Newcastle people should be very concerned at the efforts of certain interests over many years to filch public parklands
Newcastle people should be very concerned at the efforts of certain interests over many years to filch Newcastle’s public parklands for their own sectional or private use.
In recent years we have seen efforts to build around the Historic Nobbys Lighthouse in contravention of the Australian Constitution and the Commonwealth EPBC Act and by the misuse of the EP&A Act to allow the proponent to virtually approve own development. Merewether Beachfront Land was recently alienated for private Development contrary to the 1930 Deed of Conveyance from the Merewether family that the land be used for public parkland and no other use whatsoever.
Now part of King Edward Park Dedicated for Recreation Reserve in 3 July 1863 is in danger of falling to private hands under the title of ‘revitalising the coast’. We must now also try to ward off the private interests wanting to take part of Dixon Park for commercial uses. Dixon Park is another Merewether family owned land parcel transferred to Newcastle 1960 the deed is attached as a pdf.
Newcastle Council has before it in the form of a draft Civic Precinct Design Framework a proposal that would widen Laman Street into Civic Park remove the trees and the green terraced area and further despoil the Civic Park Fountain and its surrounds.
The Note below commencing ‘2/12/2008 Council Committee direct GM to sign a MOU’. That committee resolution was never adopted by full council and Council never properly authorised the expenditure to fund this new euphemistically titled Coastal Revitalisation Masterplan. (I did sight the committee resolution and searched in vain to find the adoption of the Minute) I found that that Committee was disbanded at the next Full Council Meeting.
The letter below was sent to the Minister for the Hunter and Member for Newcastle when we first heard about the attempts ant the MOU. No satisfactory explanation has ever been received to this letter which was sent on or about 13th of January 2010 12 months too late. A copy of the MOU was not made available.
I would be please if Colleagues would help get the word out about Public Parkland Alienation.
Cheers and best wishes
2/12/2008 Council Committee Pdf directs GM to sign Memorum of Understanding
MOU A pdf in Newcastle File
Mon 25/01/2010 12:21 PM Why a new secretly hatched Coastal Masterplan?
Minister Jodi McKay MP promotes a Masterplan for the Newcastle Coast (Letters The Herald 25/1/2010).
Parks and Playgrounds Movement warns the people of Newcastle: Beware!
The Coastal Masterplan MOU was signed by the Newcastle Council over twelve months ago but never officially adopted by full Council. The Masterplan has been hatched outside the normal transparent and open planning framework that has protected Newcastle beaches and its foreshore since statutory town planning began.
It is especially worrying when it is clear that alienation of coastal parkland is proposed.
Our coast is a scarce and priceless resource held in trust by our councillors for all the people of NSW. Newcastle Council already has a fully researched an openly adopted Coastline Study and all its parks and reserves are subject to official plans of management with open processes for change.
Why is this covert masterplan being promoted by the State at the unnecessary cost to the people of Newcastle?
Doug Lithgow
President
The Hon. Jodi McKay MP
Minister for Tourism Minister for the Hunter
Minister for Science and Medical Research Minister for Women
Wednesday, 13 January 2010
Dear Jodi
Bogey Hole, King Edward Park & Coastal Management
Parks and Playgrounds Movement is pleased to note your article ‘Coastal development to fund infrastructure’ in today’s Herald 12/1/2010 and the previous article by Cr John Tate Lord Mayor about the Bogey Hole and coast published in the Herald 8/1/2010.
Cr Tate indicated that the Bogey Hole and the coast are owned by the Government and Council needs assistance in its management and that the Newcastle Council gave the Land & Property Management Authority $150,000 to prepare a land use plan.
Our coast is a scarce and priceless resource which is held in trust for the people of NSW. Elected Councillors and Members of Parliament as Trustees are expected to do all in their power to protect that scarce resource for the benefit of all people and tomorrow’s people.
Parks and Playgrounds Movement is concerned that the terms of reference for a new ‘Newcastle Coastal Masterplan’ and the basis for its preparation have not been transparently published. Your article refers to a MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) which to our knowledge has not been made public. Land use planning in the Hunter since 1952 has aimed to protect waterfronts from alienation and make them available for the public in coastal and foreshore reserves.
In regard to the Bogey Hole (SHR 1678) it is an integral part of the existing King Edward Park Crown Land parcel. It was formerly part of the 87 acres of the 2000 acre Coal grant to the AA Company retained by the Crown in 1824. King Edward Park including the Bogey Hole was dedicated for Public Recreation in March 1894. The Park has an absolute water frontage and Newcastle Council has exercised care control and management for the whole area since dedication.
We are pleased that the collapsed cliff top fence is now being reinstated and have requested that the safety chain around the pool be also restored. Furthermore we want the rusted out picnic tables to be replaced and the stairway to the pool be cleaned and drained at the side. These are simple day to day maintenance matters that do not need master planning.
Parks and Playgrounds Movement believe that it is important that a clear working relationship be maintained between the Department of Lands (Now named NSW Land & Property Management Authority) and the Newcastle Council as in the past.
However we must point out that we are appalled that Newcastle Council has allowed itself to be a party to a $300,000 dollar plan the reason for which seems to be aimed to alienate scarce coastal lands against the interests of the people of Newcastle. Your attention is also drawn to the Newcastle Council’s plans of management for its parks and the ‘Coastline Management Plan’ 2003. These adopted documents should be steering Council’s management of the coastline and attracting State Funding.
We would be especially pleased if you would make public the details of the Newcastle Council owned land at Merewether and the reason why it was transferred to the Minister for Lands by gift on 21st Aug 2008 (AE199231N) in contravention of the covenant running with the land. The Deed of conveyance clearly states “That it (The Council for its part and its successors and assigns) will at all times use and maintain the said land as a park or public reserve as defined by the Local Government Act 1919 and will not permit the same to be used for any other purpose whatsoever” (Book 1617 folio 944)
We request that you make available to the Movement a copy of the MOU and the terms of reference for the preparation of the Coastal Master Plan. Furthermore we trust that you will make sure that our coastal reserves and distinctive coastal heritage are protected from vested interests.
Yours sincerely,
Doug Lithgow
Freeman of the City of Newcastle
President, Parks and Playgrounds Movement Inc
Saturday, February 19, 2011
King Edward Park Proposed Development
King Edward Park - Annie Street Commercial Pty Ltd do not have a lease or any tenure re: DA Function Centre on Former Bowling Club Site
Certainly the old convict Coal Mine Shaft (one of the earliest coal shafts in the country and southern hemisphere) should be accurately located opened and properly documented?
The proposal to cap it and hide it under a building should be rejected.
This land is Crown Land dedicated as Public Park and zoned as parkland openspace and recreation or RE1 in the draft plan.
The Minister for Lands is the owner Trustee for the people of NSW who are the beneficiaries of the trust.
The Minister as a Minister of the Crown is bound by an Act of Parliament the Crown Lands Act 1989.
He must abide by the appropriate Objectives of the Act when deciding the management of this land: Section 10.
Section 11 sets out the principles that he should follow in the management of this parkland site.
The company proposing the DA is Annie Street Commercial Pty Ltd they do not have a lease or any tenure at this stage.
The company is a shelf Company with a nominal value of only a few dollars.
To have placed this DA before the Council they must have had a wink or nod from a Minister of the Crown probably not the Minister for Lands who is bound by the act.
What is going on and is there a MOU somewhere that should be made public for this public land?
Annie Street Commercial Pty Ltd has no tenure of the site and the alienation of this public land should be challenged now.
Perhaps any decision should be left until we have a new government and a new Minister and hopefully new ethical standards.
The Bowling Club had a perpetual lease but it had to be revoked because of the interlopers on the site and the unlawful deals.
Now is the time for appropriate development on the site serving the public interest?
The objectives of the Crown Lands Act are being flouted and the principles as set out in the act for management of Crown Land Reserves are not being considered. The development is too large and intrusive as a park development that should serve the park and public interests not merely private and sectional interests.
One storey is sufficient for this locality and it should not be placed over the mine shaft. The public must have free and unfetted access to the park side of any building on the site. The building is particularly objectionable when viewed from the south. It is the complete privatisation of this coastal location and should not be countenanced by Newcastle people. There has not been a bona-fide Bowling Club for more than a decade and it is time the area was returned to the people with a low key use of the site.
This sort of commercial development should be in Hunter Street Not King Edward Park it would permanently alienate the people’s land!
Cheers
Doug
Objects of Act
10 Objects of Act
The objects of this Act are to ensure that Crown land is managed for the benefit of the people of New South Wales and in particular to provide for:
(a) a proper assessment of Crown land,
(b) the management of Crown land having regard to the principles of Crown land management contained in this Act,
(c) the proper development and conservation of Crown land having regard to those principles,
(d) the regulation of the conditions under which Crown land is permitted to be occupied, used, sold, leased, licensed or otherwise dealt with,
(e) the reservation or dedication of Crown land for public purposes and the management and use of the reserved or dedicated land, and
(f) the collection, recording and dissemination of information in relation to Crown land.
Principles of Crown land management
11 Principles of Crown land management
For the purposes of this Act, the principles of Crown land management are:
(a) that environmental protection principles be observed in relation to the management and administration of Crown land,
(b) that the natural resources of Crown land (including water, soil, flora, fauna and scenic quality) be conserved wherever possible,
(c) that public use and enjoyment of appropriate Crown land be encouraged,
(d) that, where appropriate, multiple use of Crown land be encouraged,
(e) that, where appropriate, Crown land should be used and managed in such a way that both the land and its resources are sustained in perpetuity, and
(f) that Crown land be occupied, used, sold, leased, licensed or otherwise dealt with in the best interests of the State consistent with the above principles.
This letter was sent to the Newcastle Herald
The Letters Editor
Newcastle Herald
Bolton Street
Newcastle
Dear Sir,
Development in King Edward Park
The attention of the citizens of Newcastle is drawn to the under-the-counter ‘public exhibition’ of development in King Edward Park, 1 Ordinance Street, Newcastle. (On exhibition until 3 February)
The objectives of the Crown Lands Act are being flouted and the principles as set out in the Act for management of Crown Land Reserves are not being properly considered.
A firm commitment in the public interest is needed against the commercial over development of Newcastle’s premier public parkland. The current proposal is too large and intrusive as a park development that should be designed to serve the park and public not merely private interests.
The general public must be guaranteed free and unfetted access to and around any building placed on this important scenic coastal location.
Now is time the area was returned to the people with a low key public use for the site.
The sort of development proposed by the company Annie Street Commercial Pty Ltd should be in Hunter Street not King Edward Park.
Doug Lithgow
President Parks and Playgrounds movement
Certainly the old convict Coal Mine Shaft (one of the earliest coal shafts in the country and southern hemisphere) should be accurately located opened and properly documented?
The proposal to cap it and hide it under a building should be rejected.
This land is Crown Land dedicated as Public Park and zoned as parkland openspace and recreation or RE1 in the draft plan.
The Minister for Lands is the owner Trustee for the people of NSW who are the beneficiaries of the trust.
The Minister as a Minister of the Crown is bound by an Act of Parliament the Crown Lands Act 1989.
He must abide by the appropriate Objectives of the Act when deciding the management of this land: Section 10.
Section 11 sets out the principles that he should follow in the management of this parkland site.
The company proposing the DA is Annie Street Commercial Pty Ltd they do not have a lease or any tenure at this stage.
The company is a shelf Company with a nominal value of only a few dollars.
To have placed this DA before the Council they must have had a wink or nod from a Minister of the Crown probably not the Minister for Lands who is bound by the act.
What is going on and is there a MOU somewhere that should be made public for this public land?
Annie Street Commercial Pty Ltd has no tenure of the site and the alienation of this public land should be challenged now.
Perhaps any decision should be left until we have a new government and a new Minister and hopefully new ethical standards.
The Bowling Club had a perpetual lease but it had to be revoked because of the interlopers on the site and the unlawful deals.
Now is the time for appropriate development on the site serving the public interest?
The objectives of the Crown Lands Act are being flouted and the principles as set out in the act for management of Crown Land Reserves are not being considered. The development is too large and intrusive as a park development that should serve the park and public interests not merely private and sectional interests.
One storey is sufficient for this locality and it should not be placed over the mine shaft. The public must have free and unfetted access to the park side of any building on the site. The building is particularly objectionable when viewed from the south. It is the complete privatisation of this coastal location and should not be countenanced by Newcastle people. There has not been a bona-fide Bowling Club for more than a decade and it is time the area was returned to the people with a low key use of the site.
This sort of commercial development should be in Hunter Street Not King Edward Park it would permanently alienate the people’s land!
Cheers
Doug
Objects of Act
10 Objects of Act
The objects of this Act are to ensure that Crown land is managed for the benefit of the people of New South Wales and in particular to provide for:
(a) a proper assessment of Crown land,
(b) the management of Crown land having regard to the principles of Crown land management contained in this Act,
(c) the proper development and conservation of Crown land having regard to those principles,
(d) the regulation of the conditions under which Crown land is permitted to be occupied, used, sold, leased, licensed or otherwise dealt with,
(e) the reservation or dedication of Crown land for public purposes and the management and use of the reserved or dedicated land, and
(f) the collection, recording and dissemination of information in relation to Crown land.
Principles of Crown land management
11 Principles of Crown land management
For the purposes of this Act, the principles of Crown land management are:
(a) that environmental protection principles be observed in relation to the management and administration of Crown land,
(b) that the natural resources of Crown land (including water, soil, flora, fauna and scenic quality) be conserved wherever possible,
(c) that public use and enjoyment of appropriate Crown land be encouraged,
(d) that, where appropriate, multiple use of Crown land be encouraged,
(e) that, where appropriate, Crown land should be used and managed in such a way that both the land and its resources are sustained in perpetuity, and
(f) that Crown land be occupied, used, sold, leased, licensed or otherwise dealt with in the best interests of the State consistent with the above principles.
This letter was sent to the Newcastle Herald
The Letters Editor
Newcastle Herald
Bolton Street
Newcastle
Dear Sir,
Development in King Edward Park
The attention of the citizens of Newcastle is drawn to the under-the-counter ‘public exhibition’ of development in King Edward Park, 1 Ordinance Street, Newcastle. (On exhibition until 3 February)
The objectives of the Crown Lands Act are being flouted and the principles as set out in the Act for management of Crown Land Reserves are not being properly considered.
A firm commitment in the public interest is needed against the commercial over development of Newcastle’s premier public parkland. The current proposal is too large and intrusive as a park development that should be designed to serve the park and public not merely private interests.
The general public must be guaranteed free and unfetted access to and around any building placed on this important scenic coastal location.
Now is time the area was returned to the people with a low key public use for the site.
The sort of development proposed by the company Annie Street Commercial Pty Ltd should be in Hunter Street not King Edward Park.
Doug Lithgow
President Parks and Playgrounds movement
A Rail Based Solution to Historic Newcastle Station
A Rail Based solution must be stressed to maintain cityrail services to historic Newcastle Station and protect Newcastle's foreshore from greedy property speculation. All rail crossings removed in recent years should be restored and new ones crossings created where needed. Rail is the way to go to Newcastle. See Cate Faehrmann’s question on the last day of Parliament.
NEWCASTLE RAIL SERVICE
Page: 23
Ms CATE FAEHRMANN: My question is directed to the Minister for Transport. Can the Minister confirm the Labor Government's current position in relation to cutting the Newcastle train line? Given that the Newcastle city renewal transport management and accessibility plan proposes to terminate the Newcastle line at a new Wickham station, will he rule out today, on the last day of sitting for the year, cutting the line at Wickham and maintaining the current service right through to the Newcastle terminus?
The Hon. JOHN ROBERTSON: The New South Wales Government is committed to the revitalisation of the Newcastle central business district for the benefit of the people of Newcastle and the entire Hunter region. On 15 November the New South Wales Government released two transport studies that will contribute to the development of an Infrastructure Australia submission for the revitalisation of the Newcastle central business district. Both studies have been commissioned by the New South Wales Government and prepared by transport experts AECOM. The two studies have been provided to the Newcastle Central Renewal Steering Committee, which will develop the submission to Infrastructure Australia in consultation with local councils and the local community. The Government remains committed to a rail-based solution for Newcastle but recognises that work needs to be done to improve connectivity in the city centre. These reports provide some options for the steering committee to consider in consultation with the local community. Further questions on this process should be directed to the Minister for the Hunter.
NEWCASTLE RAIL SERVICE
Page: 23
Ms CATE FAEHRMANN: My question is directed to the Minister for Transport. Can the Minister confirm the Labor Government's current position in relation to cutting the Newcastle train line? Given that the Newcastle city renewal transport management and accessibility plan proposes to terminate the Newcastle line at a new Wickham station, will he rule out today, on the last day of sitting for the year, cutting the line at Wickham and maintaining the current service right through to the Newcastle terminus?
The Hon. JOHN ROBERTSON: The New South Wales Government is committed to the revitalisation of the Newcastle central business district for the benefit of the people of Newcastle and the entire Hunter region. On 15 November the New South Wales Government released two transport studies that will contribute to the development of an Infrastructure Australia submission for the revitalisation of the Newcastle central business district. Both studies have been commissioned by the New South Wales Government and prepared by transport experts AECOM. The two studies have been provided to the Newcastle Central Renewal Steering Committee, which will develop the submission to Infrastructure Australia in consultation with local councils and the local community. The Government remains committed to a rail-based solution for Newcastle but recognises that work needs to be done to improve connectivity in the city centre. These reports provide some options for the steering committee to consider in consultation with the local community. Further questions on this process should be directed to the Minister for the Hunter.
Laman Street Trees and the Civic and Cultural Precinct Newcastle.
Letters Editor
Newcastle Herald
Bolton Street
NEWCASTLE
Dear Sir,
Laman Street Trees and the Civic and Cultural Precinct Newcastle.
Parks and Playgrounds Movement were recently involved in litigation against the Newcastle City Council. Our action was taken in the public interest because it was manifestly unreasonable for Council to remove the Laman Street landscape without planning consent. Justice Biscoe however in his 36 page Judgment found that Council has power to remove the trees without planning consent. The case was a Judicial Review of Council’s decisions and did not consider the merit or otherwise of the removal.
The importance of the trees was identified at a design workshop earlier this year but a detailed plan for public exhibition was never prepared. A more experienced Council may have proceed in this instance with the planning of the precinct rather than remove the iconic trees before a plan acceptable to the community could be adopted.
It is now clear that there is no officially acceptable plan and that the risk factor for the trees was distorted by the belief that certain trees were “wind thrown” in the 2007 storm which was not the case.
Doug Lithgow
Newcastle Herald
Bolton Street
NEWCASTLE
Dear Sir,
Laman Street Trees and the Civic and Cultural Precinct Newcastle.
Parks and Playgrounds Movement were recently involved in litigation against the Newcastle City Council. Our action was taken in the public interest because it was manifestly unreasonable for Council to remove the Laman Street landscape without planning consent. Justice Biscoe however in his 36 page Judgment found that Council has power to remove the trees without planning consent. The case was a Judicial Review of Council’s decisions and did not consider the merit or otherwise of the removal.
The importance of the trees was identified at a design workshop earlier this year but a detailed plan for public exhibition was never prepared. A more experienced Council may have proceed in this instance with the planning of the precinct rather than remove the iconic trees before a plan acceptable to the community could be adopted.
It is now clear that there is no officially acceptable plan and that the risk factor for the trees was distorted by the belief that certain trees were “wind thrown” in the 2007 storm which was not the case.
Doug Lithgow
Blackbutt Reserve
Blackbutt Reserve Didn't Just Happen - Speech Notes
(Saturday, 9 April 2005) by Doug Lithgow
It is important to realise that the Newcastle Foreshore and Blackbutt Reserve or Barrington Tops Civic Park etc didn’t just become parks they had to be fought for by the Community.
· Blackbutt had its beginnings in the economic recession of the early thirties.
· Unsuccessful auction of Kotara subdivision land. Area known as Blackbutt relatively untouched.
· All local Councils were urged by Cardiff Heights Progress Ass.1937 to help buy a further 144 acres total cost 3,500 pounds. Lands Dep. paid 2,500 pounds.
· Final payment 730 pound paid 1940 by the City of Greater Newcastle (Greater Ncle formed 1938)
· The war intervened. Our Tom RE Farrell was a P&PM NSW member and started a branch here the Northern Parks and Playgrounds Movement. NP&PM started the Barrington Tops National Parks 1952 project split in 1956 to form the National Parks Ass. with Rod Earp as Pres.
· 1949 Blackbutt Res. Special Committee -new plans then shelved. Plans for a Trust, Aviaries a Zoo, Gardens etc. Council continued to block extensions to the 131 acres. Northern Parks and Playgrounds Movement formed 1952 Matters came to a head in 1956-7 with proposed subdivision of adjacent 266 acres of bushland purchased by Newcastle Council from the E&S Mining Coy.. P& PM called public meeting July 56 to have the 266 acres added to the Reserve. Widespread support. National Parks Ass formed Rod Earp P&PM President and Newcastle Alderman Joe Richley & Tom Farrell President. spoke strongly -Three of competing plans.
· A new Council 16 Nov 1959 adopted in principle the Special Committee’s proposal that the 270 acres be added 9 votes to 8. Full Council adopted the park plan 11 vote to 9. New plan prepared by G. Baddley, Engineer, E. Wilmot County Planner R. Earp NPA, J. Richley P&PM.
· Permanent workforce appointed to Reserve 1962 - one man and a youth. Picnic area and roads built.
· 1963 High School proposed for Reserve Alienation of 22 acres– Protest meeting and huge public Meeting in Town Hall. Conflict resolved when Minister for Education withdrew proposal. Lots of activity and development.. By 1966 Blackbutt described as a “Little Eden” ‘enchanting bushland’ a great blessing to City.
· August 1966 the Highway 23 proposal to cut through 3 of the valleys of the Reserve. The Blackbutt Action Committee set up under the leadership of Dick Woodgate as secretary. ‘Save Blackbutt” fight starts in earnest July 1967 when City Council reaffirms its support for the expressway through the Reserve. The fight raged on 800 people at a City Hall Public Meeting declared no expressway in the Reserve and the Expressway should be routed to the West of Lake Macquarie.
· Further meetings 1972 and 1973. By Dec 74 there was overwhelming support for the Reserve. Federal Parliamentary Committee found that in no circumstances should Highway 23 violate Blackbutt. Peter Morris as Federal Transport Minister initiated the west of Lake as part of the National Highway Scheme.
· Blackbutt Landscape Study prepared 1976 proposed restoration Mine site implemented Nov. 1983 by Lord Mayor Joy Cummings. Comprehensive Plan of Management 1989.
· Improved Wildlife and aviary exhibits proposed 1992 and constructed.
· Continuing improvements to Blackbutt. Blackbutt is now ingrained as part of the folk law of Newcastle. ‘Dick became the Chairman of the National Trust Hunter Region
· 79 Newcastle organizations supported in writing the Reserve Proposal in 1957 and support is continuing. 180ha or 449ac still not dedicated until the 80’s.
Doug Lithgow
(Saturday, 9 April 2005) by Doug Lithgow
· Blackbutt had its beginnings in the economic recession of the early thirties.
· Unsuccessful auction of Kotara subdivision land. Area known as Blackbutt relatively untouched.
· It was owned by the London based English and Scottish Mining Coy. 4 blocks sold in Reserve. 2 to Returned Sailors & Soldiers, 1 each to Tom Farrell and Thomas Marshall. Tom R.E. Farrell originated the Blackbutt Reserve concept. Tom Farrell’s block Lot 51, 17acres 3 Roods became the first official part of the Reserve Gov. Gaz.March 4 1938. There was slow progress through the thirties efforts made by the Parks and Playgrounds Movement of NSW (Charles EW Bean Sec. David Stead, Dorothea Mackellar Vice Pres.)
· All local Councils were urged by Cardiff Heights Progress Ass.1937 to help buy a further 144 acres total cost 3,500 pounds. Lands Dep. paid 2,500 pounds.
· Final payment 730 pound paid 1940 by the City of Greater Newcastle (Greater Ncle formed 1938)
· The war intervened. Our Tom RE Farrell was a P&PM NSW member and started a branch here the Northern Parks and Playgrounds Movement. NP&PM started the Barrington Tops National Parks 1952 project split in 1956 to form the National Parks Ass. with Rod Earp as Pres.
· 1949 Blackbutt Res. Special Committee -new plans then shelved. Plans for a Trust, Aviaries a Zoo, Gardens etc. Council continued to block extensions to the 131 acres. Northern Parks and Playgrounds Movement formed 1952 Matters came to a head in 1956-7 with proposed subdivision of adjacent 266 acres of bushland purchased by Newcastle Council from the E&S Mining Coy.. P& PM called public meeting July 56 to have the 266 acres added to the Reserve. Widespread support. National Parks Ass formed Rod Earp P&PM President and Newcastle Alderman Joe Richley & Tom Farrell President. spoke strongly -Three of competing plans.
· A new Council 16 Nov 1959 adopted in principle the Special Committee’s proposal that the 270 acres be added 9 votes to 8. Full Council adopted the park plan 11 vote to 9. New plan prepared by G. Baddley, Engineer, E. Wilmot County Planner R. Earp NPA, J. Richley P&PM.
· Permanent workforce appointed to Reserve 1962 - one man and a youth. Picnic area and roads built.
· 1963 High School proposed for Reserve Alienation of 22 acres– Protest meeting and huge public Meeting in Town Hall. Conflict resolved when Minister for Education withdrew proposal. Lots of activity and development.. By 1966 Blackbutt described as a “Little Eden” ‘enchanting bushland’ a great blessing to City.
· August 1966 the Highway 23 proposal to cut through 3 of the valleys of the Reserve. The Blackbutt Action Committee set up under the leadership of Dick Woodgate as secretary. ‘Save Blackbutt” fight starts in earnest July 1967 when City Council reaffirms its support for the expressway through the Reserve. The fight raged on 800 people at a City Hall Public Meeting declared no expressway in the Reserve and the Expressway should be routed to the West of Lake Macquarie.
· Further meetings 1972 and 1973. By Dec 74 there was overwhelming support for the Reserve. Federal Parliamentary Committee found that in no circumstances should Highway 23 violate Blackbutt. Peter Morris as Federal Transport Minister initiated the west of Lake as part of the National Highway Scheme.
· Blackbutt Landscape Study prepared 1976 proposed restoration Mine site implemented Nov. 1983 by Lord Mayor Joy Cummings. Comprehensive Plan of Management 1989.
· Improved Wildlife and aviary exhibits proposed 1992 and constructed.
· Continuing improvements to Blackbutt. Blackbutt is now ingrained as part of the folk law of Newcastle. ‘Dick became the Chairman of the National Trust Hunter Region
· 79 Newcastle organizations supported in writing the Reserve Proposal in 1957 and support is continuing. 180ha or 449ac still not dedicated until the 80’s.
Doug Lithgow
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)