IS this more evidence of …
-local ambivalence (conflicting ideas)
-local opportunism and greed
-local coercion (persuasion, threats, bullying)
THAT were the catalyst that kicked off this and other similar endeavours by foreign entities?
Do many of us get a sickening feeling when, once again we see our TITLE DEEDS exported often with more than a blessing from political operatives, cohorts and sycophants amongst us?
Massive Chinese development facing uncertain future on Tasmania’s east coast
23 NOVEMBER 2019
The Tasmanian Planning Commission has rejected a controversial Chinese-backed resort on Tasmania’s east coast, amid concerns landowners have not given consent.
- The Planning Commission was not satisfied landowners had consented to the massive development
- The commission described the evidence of Cambria’s Ronald Hu *as “defensive, evasive”
- Developers will now have to consider resubmitting a proposal to the council for the $140m development
The commission found the Glamorgan Spring Bay Council’s decision to initiate a planning amendment for the Cambria Green resort was invalid, and the proponent would now have to go back to square one.
The proposed $140 million resort near Swansea includes 240 units, 70 villas and a luxury hotel on 3,000 acres.
The council approved the development, but there needed to be changes to the area’s planning scheme to allow the project to go ahead.
The council could now reject any new proposal outright, or put it out to public comment again.
The commission was not convinced the project received proper consent from the landowners to build on property at Dolphin Sands, near Swansea.
Mr Liu was the sole signatory on owner consent letters from seven companies.
*The site is made up of 12 titles with several owners including Cambria Green Agriculture and company owner Liu Kejing, and contains the heritage-listed Cambria homestead and a number of registered Aboriginal sites.
Uncertain future for development
The project was initially approved by the Glamorgan Spring Bay Council, as were the necessary changes to the area’s planning scheme in order for the development to go ahead.
In November 2018, the council voted in favour of necessary rezoning of agricultural land to allow the resort to be constructed in a region, a development that would now be considered a township.
The commission chair Ann Cunningham and delegate Peter Fischer released their decision late on Friday that the requirements of full consent from landowners were not met.
They also concluded the commission could no longer make a decision on the changes to rezoning laws affecting the current development proposal.
*The commission heard in a Hobart hearing in August concerns that the same signature was used on several required letters of consent.
Cambria’s responses ‘defensive, evasive and not credible’
Cambria’s chief executive Ronald Hu claimed before the commission the company had authorisation to sign multiple documents on behalf of all landowners.
The commission found his responses to be “defensive, evasive and not credible” during the hearing.
This is not the first time the proposed development has faced controversy, with concerns over foreign ownership of Tasmanian land, and a code of conduct breach by a councillor when voting for the rezoning changes.
A spokesperson for Cambria Green said the company was reviewing the tribunal’s decision and would consider its options.