Chronology of Gales-Kingscliff
The majority of Gales-Kingscliff holdings was purchased by Dr Harry Segal (M.B., M.S. [SYD] .FRCS [ENG], FRACS, FACS) in 1969 in order to raise cattle, as many of his colleagues were doing, and as an interesting pastime for his retirement. Dr Segal had always lived in beachside suburbs, and wanted to stay in coastal areas. Dr Segal raised cattle and then horses on the land.
Dr Segal was the Senior Honorary Surgeon at Sutherland Hospital, Sydney from 1958 to 1975 and in 1964 developed Kareena Private Hospital, Sydney, one of the first and most advanced private major surgical hospitals in Australia. See http://www.kareenaprivate.com.au/aboutus/history.asp
In 1972 Dr Segal applied to Hurstville Council, Sydney, to build a 120 bed hospital, the first proposal specifically to undertake coronary bypass surgery, many years before it was generally accepted, and which would have saved thousands of lives, but his application was rejected by Hurstville Council in a closed meeting.
In 1974, at Council’s urgent request, Gales sold council 10 hectares of industrial land for a nominal figure. The then Shire President, Clarrie Hall, visited Dr Harry and said that it was most important to sell the land to Council, and Dr Harry agreed immediately, as a good citizen.
Council allowed a factory development to build before the land sale was completed! Council then sold of that land at considerable profit to Council.
Council should never have been in the developing business, if there were buyers for the land, it should have informed Gales, which it did not.
Subsequently Council asked Dr Harry to sell to them all of his remaining land for Council to develop a lakes development. Dr Harry refused as he wished to continue his grazing interests on the land.
After several years of costly planning, Gales submitted a plan for development in 1980. Council did not approve the plan on the basis that they were waiting for drainage plans to be completed.
Dr Segal became discouraged, and spent much time in the following years in United States, and subsequently his son and current Managing Director of Gales-Kingscliff, Dr Stephen Segal, took over management.
Rudman v Tweed Shire Council, 28 September 1993, unreported, NSWLEC – Roy Rudman, a Kingscliff local, wins a major case against the Council, in the Land & Environment Court, to stop Council from constructing a effluent sludge turf farm on the land west of the Sewer Treatment Plant in Kingscliff.
Bignold J allowed the appeal by Mr Rudman on the merits and Council was refused development consent for its proposed turf farm.
In February 1998 as a result of his extensive observation in Australia and overseas with beach developments, Dr Harry informed Mayor Boyd and senior planning officers that he did not want any unnecessary commercial development on his land near Kingscliff beach. The inevitable problems would be unnecessary traffic and insufficient parking. Parking was the main essential in all modern planning.
Dr Harry rejected on these grounds the plan by Council for the large Distrct Centre for the Coast on his land adjacent to the beach precinct.
Gales Holdings Pty Ltd v Tweed Shire Council  NSWLEC 195 - In the Land and Environment Court, Gales succeeded in demonstrating that the turf farm proposed by Council is not part of the sewage treatment works and thus does not come within clause 11 of SEPP 4.
The purcahse of this land (shown in the picture) was in part to allow Council to relocate Kingscliff Sewer Treatment Plant (STP) away from the urban areas with encroaching residential development.
Council commissioned the Kingscliff Centre Study by consultants Patrick Partners. The retail report recommended 3 possible sites for District Centre: Chinderah Site, at Kingscliff beach (later ruled out by Council resolution) and Kings Forest (ruled out in the report due to access constraints and koalas).
Gales enters into contracts with Council to purchase the Sewer Treatment Plant land in Kingscliff and sell to Council much less costly and more suitable land west of Tweed Coast road in order to relocate Council’s STP (see picture above).
6 November 2002
29 November 2002
19 February 2003
The DCP No. 9 (version 2) includes recommendations and design concepts for a town centre adjacent to Turnock Street adjacent to the existing township. DCP No. 9 (v2) states that “the proposed district town centre is to be located to the immediate west of the existing retail in Pearl Street along Turnock Street (page DCP 9-5). It also identifies the STP site as “area proposed for extension of business and industrial area adjacent.”
2 July 2003
Minutes of Meeting of Tweed Shire Council p253 – Notice of Motion Cr Brimsmead, Council determines it does not favour locating a district shopping centre on Turnock St – no further time or resources be spent on planning for it, or allowing its possibly location on Turnock St to influence any planning decisions.
Council blocked the development on the grounds of inadequate drainage and fauna protection, both of which resulted directly from Council’s improper actions. Council stated that it prefers locating the new supermarket closer to the existing Action supermarket (now Woolworths) at Kingscliff.
Gales withdraws its DA to satisfy council requirements and prepares a second DA for a local supermarket adjacent to the existing supermarket in Kingscliff.
Council’s retail consultant Core Economics identifies the need for a “large general-purpose retail centre” on the Tweed Coast, and recommends Chinderah (Gales land) as the ideal site to host 24 hectares of “place-based retail” and 10 hectares for a “general retail centre”. The report states (page 52):
“Core Economics has considered a range of potential site options and only one area in the vicinity of the Pacific Highway is apparent, being located at Chinderah Road at Chinderah, which seems to have the capacity to effectively host such a centre.”
This and the subsequent Core reports (November 2003 and January 2004) were not released by the Council officers to the Councillors or to the public. Core’s fouth report of September 2005 was finally adopted as Council’s retail strategy (the fouth report was very different from Core Economics original reports, in that the fouth report no longer recommended a District Centre at Chinderah).
Gales discovered that the Core Economics reports existed as a result of discovery during court proceedings relating to the rezoning of the Chinderah site. The 3 initial Core reports were ultimately made public as a result of Gales successful Freedom of Information action (see below, July 2005).
As a result of being told by a Council officer that ‘only 15ha’ was developable at the Chinderah site, Core altered their recommendation as in their October report. In fact, 50 ha of land is developable at the Chinderah site. Council never corrected the false information provided to Core Economics, despites Gales informing Council that they provided incorrect and misleading information to Core Economics.
19 November 2003
The following changes from the Geolink LES were resolved at the meeting:
“The proposed 3(c) Commerce & Trade zone be replaced with 4(a) Industrial zone”
The reason for the inconsistency between Geolinks recommendation and Council resolution was due to comments Council’s Engineering Service Division which rejected Trade and Commerce due to:
(a) land geometry and compatibility of zone boundaries with future road and lot layout;
(c) 3(c) Trade & Commerce is de facto retail and lead to generation of high traffic volumes .
16 December 2003
Planning Strategy 4.5 states: “Provide a district town centre for the Tweed Coast that comprises of between 10,000 square metre and 20,000 square metre of retail floor space. (The location of the town centre will be the subject of future decision making by Council).” Council planners continue to favour Kingscliff.
3 March 2004
29 March 2004
Tweed Futures Council paper of June 2004 states “Another major centre may be needed to serve the growing coastal population during the next decade or two”.
Gales Holdings Pty Ltd v Tweed Shire Council (No. 2)  NSWLEC 351 – In the Land and Environment Court, Bignold J made no order as to costs in the discontinued proceedings (concerning Gales Notice of Discontinuance regarding Gales development application for a Woolworths based supermarket and specialty shops on the corner of Turnock St and Elrond Drive) because the litigation history and the parties’ conduct not justify the conclusion that it was fair and reasonable to make a costs order against either party.
Gales note: Gales withdrew its first application for a Woolworths based surpermarket on the corner of Turnock St and Elrond Drive due to Council’s ecological consultant hearing “100’s of Wallum Sedge Frogs” at the site (these are listed as a endangered species). It was later discovered that no Wallum Sedge Frogs were present at the site, but only the common froglet which are widespread in NSW coastal regions.
28 October 2004
27 October 2004
Gales lodged class 4 application at the Land and Environment Court requesting a declaration that Tweed Local Environmental Plan 2000 (Amendment No. 14) gazetted on 6 August 2004 is invalid (this plan zoned the former sewer plant land at Chinderah to ‘Industrial’).
8 November 2004
Contracts settle (contacts exchanged on 28 May 2004) in regard to 48.64 hectares of specially protected prime agricultural land at Old Bogangar Rd, Cudgen Lot 330 in DP 755701 (the price is $9.5 million). It is later exposed that a major retailer has a mortgage over the site i.e. there are plans, to develop a district or other shopping centre on that land. The mortgage documents indicate that an ‘extra’ $5 million will be paid to the sellers if the land is rezoned for residential/retail development.
Gales Holdings Pty Limited v Tweed Shire Council  NSWADT 168 – In the NSW Administrative Decisions Tribunal, Higgings S (Judicial Member) ordered that Council publicly release the documents that Council claimed were confidential, being the Council commissioned Core Economics retail reports of 31 October 2003, 15 November 2003 and January 2004. Costs awarded to Gales.
For the evidence revealing Council planner's lying and concealment of 3 vital retail reports and misleading Council as to their existence, please click here - ADT Transcripts.
Gales note: As a result of this decision against Council, the first such FOI win in at least 30 years, the Core Economics reports, which identified Chinderah (Gales land) as the ideal site for the district centre, became available to the public.
Some selected recommendations in Core Economics 4th “draft” report were adopted by the Council in their resolution of November 2005. This report identifies the Chinderah site as a new bulky goods precinct ‘when the Tweed Heads South precinct reaches capacity'.
Core Economics original recommendation that a District Centre is needed on the Tweed Coast, and that the only location is the Chinderah site, is no longer in the report.
1 November 2005
Gales Holdings Pty Limited v Minister for Infrastructure and Planning and Anor  NSWLEC 617 – In the Land and Environment Court, Bignold J found that Council’s decision to rezone the former Sewer Treatment Plant land at Kingscliff to ‘Industrial’ was not unreasonable (this decision was overturned by the NSW Supreme Court in December 2006).
This decision was overturned by the NSW Court of Appeal on 21 December 2006 in Gales Holdings Pty Ltd v Minister for Infrastructure and Planning  NSWCA 388).
16 November 2005
Gales carries out its first survey of Tweed Coast residents to ask if they think that there should be a new district centre on the Tweed Coast. 75% of the 675 respondents want a new district centre on the Tweed Coast, and over two-thirds of respondents support holding an independent inquiry into the need for a coastal district centre, at which all options would be considered.
9 December 2005
February and April
Gales Holdings Pty Limited v Tweed Shire Council  NSWLEC 212 - In the Land and Environment Court, Talbot J determined that Gales was required to prepare a Species Impact Statement in regard to its development application around Turnock Street, as the proposed development is likely to have a significant impact on the Mitchell’s Rainforest Snail (determined February 2006) and the Wallum Froglet (determined April 2006).
In September 2006 each party was ordered to pay their own large costs for the SIS proceedings.
The survey asks Tweed Shire residents:
1. whether they support the development of a new multi-purpose District Centre at Chinderah; and
2. whether they oppose the expansion of Tweed City (in South Tweed) beyond its present size.
Results of Tweed Shire retail survey:
Gales Holdings Pty Ltd v Minister for Planning & Australian Bay Lobster Producers Pty Ltd  NSWLEC 347 - In the Land and Environment Court, Talbot J found that the Minister was not the correct consent authority for approval of the Lobster Farm, therefore the consent granted by the Minister was invalid.
Background: In December 2005, despite strong community objections, the Minister for Planning approved the development application submitted by Australian Bay Lobster Producers Pty Ltd, to construct facilities for the breeding and growing of “bay lobsters” (Thenus spp, Moreton Bay Bug). The proposal included the tank-based commercial aquaculture facility and associated seawater supply works located within the floodplain in the catchment of the Tweed River. This proposal (which was finally approved in August 2006) will increase the liability to flooding along th Tweed River.
20 June 2006
On 9 August 2006 Gales receives a response from the NSW Department of Planning stating that they do not support Gales Part 3A ‘State Significant Development’ application for the proposed sub-regional town centre for a number of reasons.
Minister for Planning & Anor Gales Holdings Pty Limited  NSWCA 212 – The NSW Court of Appeal found that the granting of development consent to the Lobster Farm by the Minister was valid, and that the matter be remitted to the Land & Environment Court for another point of law to be determined (see decision of Talbot J in August 2006).
Gales Holdings Pty Ltd v Minister for Planning & Australian Bay Lobster Producers Pty Ltd  NSWLEC 483 - In the Land and Environment Court, Talbot J found that the Minister’s approval of the Lobster Farm was valid (Gales had contested the Minister’s decision to approve the Lobster Farm development of Australian Bay Lobster Producers Pty Ltd).
9 August 2006
1 August 2006 and
24 August 2006
The petition containing 2,735 signatures calling for the repeal by Tweed Shire Council of its decision to prevent planning for a new District Centre at Chinderah, and in favour of the commencement of planning for that centre, was delivered to the Administrators (1/8/06) and to the Minister for Planning Mr Sartor (24/8/06).
18 August 2006
Gales Holdings Pty Limited v Tweed Shire Council  NSWLEC 591 - In the Land and Environment Court, Talbot J determined that each party was to pay their own costs in respect of whether a Species Impact Statement was required for the development applications around Turnock Street (ie. Council was not awarded costs).
5 December 2006
Gales receives letter from Minister for Planning, Frank Sartor, regarding the petition supplied to him for the Tweed Coast District Centre at Chinderah. The letter states that the land is not zoned for the proposed use and is inconsistent with the Draft North Coast Regional Strategy and Council’s Retail Strategy of September 2005. The letter goes on to state:
“The subject land is identified for future employment lands, being predominantly commercial and industrial uses. Should you decide to amend your proposal to a use consistent with the current zoning, the Department will be willing to meet with you to discuss any amended proposal.”
21 December 2006
Gales Holdings Pty Ltd v Minister for Infrastructure and Planning  NSWCA 388 - The NSW Court of Appeal overturned the decision of Bignold J (November 2005), and found that Tweed Shire Council’s decision to rezone the former Sewerage Treatment Plant site at Chinderah to ‘Industrial’ is invalid. The Court of Appeal found that the Council was bound, but failed, to take into consideration Core Economics’ final retail report (the retail report commissioned by Council).
Substantial costs for the LEC and Appeals cases were awarded to Gales.
Gales note: The industrial zoning was voided, and Council plans concerning retail planning in the Shire apparently invalidated. That will allow a properly conducted study and planning process for the highly recommended Chinderah centre.
22 December 2006
Gales Holdings Pty Ltd v Valuer General  NSWLEC 798 - In the Land and Environment Court, Gales succeeds in maintaining its objections regarding the valuations of its land by the Valuer General.
The Court ordered that the Valuer General pay one-half of the Applicant’s costs incurred at the hearing.
24 March 2007
In NSW State Elections in March 2007, Gales Director Dr Harry Segal ran as in Independent in the 'Independents Day Group' for the NSW Upper House. His purpose in nominating as an independent was "to make every effort to stop biassed groups, particularly the Greens, having excessive influence contrary to the best interests and employment-creation needs of the community".
25 May 2007
On 25 May 2007, the High Court of Australia dismissed Council's appeal regarding the rezoning of Council's former sewer treatment site (Council appealed the decision of the Supreme Court which found in Gales favour), and awarded costs to Gales. For more information click here.
On 16 October 2007 Gales succeeded in a Land & Environment Court appeal against Council's refusal to allow Gales to temporarily graze cattle on the former sewer treatment plant site at Chinderah, which Gales acquired from Council in 2005 and on which Gales proposes to build a district shopping centre.
"Gales win case against TSC
- Segal warning as rezoning battle goes on", Daily News, 18
October 2007 - Article
Council served a Notice on Gales that it would not decontaminate and remediate area 2c of the STP site at Chinderah. The Deed of Call Option (January 2002) with Gales provided that Council must decontaminate and remediate this area unless to do so was prohibitive or impracticable. Gales was forced to dispute the Notice in the Supreme Court. Council withdrew their Notice and Gales claimed costs. Council agreed to pay Gales $9000 for the Supreme Court proceedings.
December 2007 - NSW Planning Minister The Hon Frank Sartor announces 'NSW
Government to investigate West Kingscliff'
The Media Release states:
For a copy of the Media Release, please click
|Gales-Kingscliff © 1969 - 2018||Home • Current News • Contact Us|