Chances of landslides a factor to consider in Terranora Village Estate court hearing

The appeal of the refusal of the modification of a 110-lot residential estate has begun in the Land Environment Court, with land stability brought up as a point of contention.

Satellite image of the land in Terranora where the proposed Terranora Village Estate is to be built.

A decision as to whether a modification of a residential development in Terranora will be approved may come down to whether the land is considered stable or not.

The hearing of Horseshoe Properties Pty Ltd and Tweed Shire Council began in the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales on Wednesday following a site visit on Tuesday.

The applicant has appealed a decision made by the council to refuse a development modification for the Terranora Village Estate.

The original development, approved in 1999, was for a 101 lot residential subdivision with open space.

The modification would see the subdivision increased to 110 lots, four more than a previously approved modification from the original development, however the previously approved five lots are not relevant to the court proceedings.

Also of contention is the movement of a lot allocated for open space.

Two resident objectors addressed the court, one from Horseshoe Road and the other from Chisholm Circuit.

The Horseshoe Road resident said her concern was the changes to a public walkway in Terranora and the changes to the flora and fauna in the area – however Horseshoe’s solicitor pointed out there were no changes proposed to the walkway in question.

The resident on Chisholm Circuit said he was concerned Horseshoe Properties was already advertising lots in a 110-lot subdivision and the new proposed open space area was in a spot that often flooded.

The solicitor for Tweed Shire Council, Heather Irish, in her opening statements said the main contentions were the modification was substantially different to the original approved application.

Ms Irish said regarding the relocation of the open land lot which would open up the previous lot to further development due to the zoning of the area.

Sub development plans at Terranora Village Estate.

She told the court the movement of the lot meant land owners adjacent to approved open space would now be 180m to 600m from the new open space and a buffer between residential and public reserves would no longer exist.

She told the court the addition of four lots and the extension of a cul-de-sac should also not be approved as it did not meet a criteria of leading to better urban design.

Geotechnical research was as used as a point of contention with Ms Irish arguing further reports were needed not only on the new location for the open space but for each individual lot due to the modifications impacting the size of some of the lots.

The solicitor for Horseshoe Properties, Angela Pearman, disputed this claim and said the geotechnical research had already been done in a slope stability assessment where it was conceded the land in question was considered unstable and subject to landslides.

“This expert is not hiding away from any of the difficulties and the challenges of this area,” Ms Pearman said.

She said however according to the report, provided groundwater and storm water was managed following expert recommendations, the long term stability of the land would be deemed safe to a satisfactory level.

The parties also argued if the open space lot in question required to be usable space; Ms Irish said in the original position on the original development this was not a requirement, however Ms Pearman argued reports from council said this was a requirement.

Ms Pearman sad the open space lot in the original position was not usable with the existing asphalt path deteriorating and on a steep slope.

The hearing continues on Thursday.