The new walkway to Hungry Point has reinforced the beauty and value of the shire's waterways. Picture by Murray Trembath

Sutherland Shire Environment Centre has disputed statements supporting the waterways land rezoning proposal, while saying this was "not a personal attack on waterfront property owners".

Subscribe now for unlimited access.

or signup to continue reading

Centre spokesman Cooper Riach was responding to comments by waterfront construction consultant Craig Turner to the Leader ahead of a scheduled crucial council vote on April 28.

RELATED

Mr Riach said there were 26 LEPs (local environmental plans) along coastal NSW with waterway zones similar to Sutherland.

"Twelve of them prohibit mooring pens in their W1 zones," he said.

Mr Riach also disputed that Sutherland Council had the strictest controls among all councils.

The council is due to vote on the rezoning proposal on April 28. Picture supplied

"Other councils, Central Coast for example, use conservation zones and mapped overlays to protect visual landscapes and environmentally sensitive areas," he said.

"This type of control is much more detailed than the zoning based controls used in Sutherland."

Mr Riach denied swing moorings were more environmentally damaging than a mooring pen.

"The primary environmental impact from any mooring is damage to sea grass beds," he said.

"Swing moorings in Port Hacking are generally in deep water where there are no sea grass beds while mooring pens will be closer to shore and more likely to impact them.

"Swing moorings have been configured for many years to avoid chains damaging the sea floor at no extra cost. There is no solution to the shadowing effect of a mooring pen on a sea grass bed."

Mr Riach said the primary function of zoning was to make clear what development was preferred in a locality.

"Clear zoning has many benefits, avoided costs to proponents of proposals that are incompatible, avoided costs to council of assessing unsuitable proposals, removing the uncertainty and stress for residents of unwanted proposals and ultimately saving everyone from the costs of defending rejected proposal in the courts when a developer doesn't get their way," he said.

"I am really concerned about appeals to the courts that the rezoning will allow. When it goes to the courts we all lose, the community, the council and the environment."

Mr Riach said, "This is not a personal attack on waterfront property owners".

"These members of our community have the beautiful privilege of enjoying our foreshores so intimately," he said.

"They are the first among us who have a vital role to play in managing our waterways' foreshores. We invite everyone in the Shire to join in protecting our waterways for future generations to enjoy."