Deeban Spit, which is visited by endangered shorebirds, is close to waterfront areas proposed for rezoning to W2. Picture by John Veage

Groups that opposed the move to rezone waterfront land in Sutherland Shire are relieved by the council's decision to dump the plan, but have concerns about the modified proposal.

Subscribe now for unlimited access.

or signup to continue reading

The marine structures consultant, who coordinated a campaign for rezoning, said it was "a fair and balanced outcome".

Sutherland Shire Council voted on Tuesday night to proceed with a revised Planning Proposal to include boat mooring pens as a permitted use in the W1 (Natural Waterways) zone, where they are not allowed at present.

Sutherland Shire Environment Centre spokesman Cooper Riach said it was "a relief that the council has listened to the clear voice of the community and withdrawn the Waterways Planning Proposal".

"Residential neighbourhoods have avoided the intrusion of marinas, kiosks and charter boat facilities," he said.

"The natural landscapes that are the backdrop to the Shire are safe from clearing for boat houses, swimming pools and tennis courts."

Boat mooring pen. Picture supplied

Mr Riach said, "it wasn't all good news".

"Sutherland Shire Council has again surprised the community.

This time, Cr Pesce introduced an amendment no-one outside Council had seen. It seeks to add mooring pens as a permissible use in natural waterways across the Shire.

"Despite speakers clearly talking against this amendment, the council agreed to pursue introducing private aqua-car parks for boats in public spaces across all natural waterways in the Shire.

"It is apparent that the eight councillors who voted for the amendment remain committed to further development in our natural waterways despite the clear message from the community to stop.

"Should Council pursue this amendment it places a greater burden for both consent and compliance.

"While Cr Pesce claims strong controls are already in place there are real concerns among the community about compliance."

Craig Turner, of Harbour Planning, who led the rezoning campaign, said, "From my perspective, it was a great result".

"I think a continuing prohibition of boatsheds, marinas and the like for Port Hacking and the Georges River is appropriate.

"The amendment to allow the submission of applications for mooring pens is a fair and balanced outcome.

"Applications will still have to go through all the current state government processes and be assessed and analysed on their merits by the council."

Mr Turner said, based on what occurred when Georges River Council abolished the W1 zone, "I think there will be a few applications, but not a cavalcade".

"Some will be approved and some will be refused," he said.

Southern Shores Reconciliation chairperson Sonja Scherer said, "From a First Nations perspective, this decision exposes a deeper problem in governance"

"Council says it is protecting waterways, yet it is still prepared to make exceptions that privilege private use over Country.

"That is not strong environmental leadership. It is selective decision-making that tries to appear balanced while weakening the very protections it claims to uphold.

"The issue is not just piers or one structure here and there. The issue is the mindset behind the decision.

Waterways are being treated as negotiable space around private property, rather than living parts of Country with ecological and cultural integrity of their own."

"Once decision-making starts from what can be allowed instead of what must be protected, the environment is already place second if not lost forever. The decision shows how little weight country is acknowledged.

"The outcome shows for all to see, Council still has not drawn a clear line in defence of waterways. From a First Nations perspective, that is the real failure."