Quotable Quotes - Re MCC Golf Course Development
The following Hansard and media release extracts give some insight into the thinking of the Murrumbidgee Country Club and the Government with regard to development within the West Kambah Precinct. namely the proposal for building of ~ 200 houses on the MCC Golf Course:
The URLs with full transcripts are all worth reading in full, if you have the time.
Please note pages 131 to 140 of the "Transcript
of Evidence" before the Standing
Committee on Planning and Environment"
http://www.hansard.act.gov.au/hansard/2003/comms/plan23.pdf
Warren James
[General Manager of the MCC [with Mr. David O'Keeffe of Madison Constructions by his side] 7th. JULY 2004"With a large input of capital funding, we would be able to considerably reduce a lot of ongoing expenses, continue with development and make the club more competitive in the marketplace. This would also secure our future.
Finally, the land is available, the members and residents are supportive and we have a developer willing. The only thing we need is the cooperation of the planning minister and the ACT planning authority."
Mr W James 136
The Chair:
"You also indicated that members and residents were supportive of the proposal that you have put forward. Does that mean that you have spoken to the people at Gleneagles and they are supportive of these proposals?"Mr James
"A large percentage of the people at Gleneagles are members of the golf club and play golf. That is why they went there. Down the track, if need be, I think I can soon gather up some signatures from members and residents to support it without too much trouble."Mrs. Dunne
"I just want to go back, if I could: it seems to me that part of the problem was in the initial planning for the golf course; the land available is too big for an economically run golf course. Then there are the issues about the location of the clubhouse. Did the club at any time consider hiving off some of the land and returning to the territory the land that was not within your needs?Mr James
"Probably not. Initially the application to the government was just to identify a piece of ground that we could have the territory plan changed for and maybe auctioned off, that involved little, if any, alteration to the golf course.What we're looking at today is some minor alterations to the golf course, for various reasons. Some of it was brought about by the demands of the members at the EGM. It was going to do away with our driving range, and the members said, No, you're not doing away with the driving range. Eventually we came up with a document that consists of about 80 or 90 pages that the members agreed to. After that the members then had to agree to a plan of the subdivision and golf course changes. We're at the stage now where we can take that plan back to the members. That was approved by the directors and the development committee only last night. It has now got to go back to another EGM in a month's time.
Mrs. Dunne
What you are actually saying is that it wouldn't be practical to necessarily excise a piece of land and say to the territory We no longer need that. Would you like to take it back and compensate us for the improvements? Part of what you are saying is that you're watering land that you don't necessarily need for golf and you are maintaining land that you don't necessarily need for golf.Mr James
Because the golf course is spread out there's not a substantial sort of slab anywhere of any one piece that we could say, Righto, we'll put a fence around it. You can have it back. We don't want it. It does mean moving some golf holes and that sort of thing to accommodate a retirement-type complex. It would also mean the same thing to hand some of it back to the government.Mrs. Dunne
If you handed some of the land back to the government, would you get enough money to reconfigure the holes?Mr James
How much are they going to give us for it?Mrs. Dunne
Have you explored that?Mr James
No, we haven't thought of that. It has never been considered because there are pockets of land here and there that the club is maintaining. Most of them have got a golf hole either side. It means removing a golf hole either way-three golf holes.Mrs. Cross
Would you considering handing back parts of that land that you weren't going to use to the government for nothing, provided you could develop part of it for aged care?Mr James
I think the committee of the golf club is prepared to look at any proposal on anything at all.Mrs. Cross
The government could then lease it back to the club, I suppose, at a peppercorn rent or something. That would be something you would consider?Mrs. Dunne
"There is a view in the community, which needs to be tested by the Planning and Environment Committee, that the proposal put forward by Madison Lifestyle Communities may fall into the category of a socially responsible package."---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also relevant - A Submission on Murrumbidgee Country Club Development to the Standing Committee on planning and Environment by by David O'Keefe (Madison Constructions Pty Ltd) on WEDNESDAY, 7 JULY 2004.
Please note reference to the Belconnen Golf Course
development proposal on pages 78 - 80
and the submission to the committee on pages 94
to 109
http://www.hansard.act.gov.au/hansard/2003/comms/plan22.pdf
ABC Stateline Broadcast: 27/02/2004
Excerpt from transcript of interview with Simon Corbell referring to the aged care/housing development proposed by Madison Constructions on Belconnen Golf Course. Full transcript: http://www.abc.net.au/stateline/act/content/2003/s1055947.htmReporter: Kathleen Hyland
Simon Corbell [ACT Planning Minister]"In my first meeting with David O'Keefe I said that the government wasn't going to support the development because it is on a golf course and that golf course has already been partially developed for housing and when that happened the first time a promise was made to the community 'no more development on the golf course' and that's what the assembly agreed to back in the early 90s. Now the golf course is saying can we please develop again and there'll be no more after this well I think that the community should take promises at their word and that's why I said no up from to David O'Keeffe. David O'Keeffe is continuing to push his proposal but he had a very timely and up front answer from the Government a long time ago - it's just that he doesn't agree with that answer."