Apologies as i didnt really read much into it and i wasnt aware Handle Group was involved. I better clarify
I am impressed that somone had the knowledge and capital to maximise the potential of this site and quite jealous of the profit margins (i can only guess it would be quite high). My point was that all those petitions couldnt stop the rezoning and i couldnt see why any of them should care. If it was council land or their own land then thats a different story
most petitions had no base in law - generally arguments surrounding traffic and noise and values etc.
profit margins aren't that great - it's the bigger picture of staged sales over a period of time that keeps a business in business.
traffic issues solved with intersection upgrades as required with higher traffic volumes.
noise - solved with DC5.1. Also the new airbus planes getting quieter and the state has recently introduced power-down entries for landing. Memo on title. Homes soundproofed for a good night's sleep.
values - not a planning matter.
I would quit if we were taking a golf course off public hands and making it private. But it's not - it's private land being used as a golf course that isn't making money and was closed before we bought it.
The beauty of something being for sale in the private realm is that capitalism gets to operate effectively. The site was up for sale for a while and a majority of people knew it was coming up for sale.
The affected social groups or neighbours could have pooled money to purchase - that would have been an awesome business model, especially with the upcoming community title changes. But they didn't.
The council could have purchased to maintain it as POS. But they didn't.
The state could have resumed the land as riverfront POS. But they didn't.
So we bought it. Rural zoning allows for rural industrial zoning - imagine what a number of sheds on this site would rent for so close to the airport! I see Dazz licking his lips about here....
But the residents said that's not appropriate in a residential neighbourhood. I would kindly suggest that maybe housing is appropriate, then? if so - great!
The residents in the area only wanted a golf course. I remember when Waterhall was being developed - the golf course had signs up along the edge of course for those lots backing onto the course clearly saying "this is a private course and these views are not guaranteed".
The community of golfers being lost is something that I, personally, have a problem with - BUT - the course was not going to continue whether we bought it or not.
The heritage house, function centre and stables are all staying as part of the new town centre. We've even offered to cede them back to Swan but they weren't interested.
Also providing 20% POS, not 10%, regardless of it's position so close to the river.
AND AND AND we're activating the river frontage for public access, whereas previously the course owned the land right up to the edge.