Save western Sydney’s former ADI Site. Website of the ADI Residents Action Group
Regional Park

The ADI Residents Action Group has since 1993 held the view that the best social and environmental outcomes for Western Sydney could only be achieved if the ADI Site was saved for conservation and some passive recreation uses.

ADI RAG endeavoured to have the entire site protected as a Regional Park allowing passive recreation uses to take place where land had been degraded but preserving the majority of the site for biodiversity conservation and scientific/educational purposes. The open grassland areas that Lend Lease want to turn into suburbs would have been retained sustaining a viable Kangaroo population. Eco tourism was promoted as an obvious sustainable industry that would achieve economic returns to the local economy.

A Regional Park is different to a National Park or a Nature Reserve as it has a primary purpose of catering for public recreation with varying degrees of conservation. Usually Regional Parks are created in areas possessing little conservation value. Section 30H of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 states:

1) The purpose of reserving land as a regional park is to identify, protect and conserve areas in a natural or modified landscape that are suitable for public recreation and enjoyment so as to enable those areas to be managed in accordance with subsection (2).

(2) A regional park is to be managed in accordance with the following principles:

(a) the provision of opportunities, in an outdoor setting, for recreation and enjoyment in natural or modified landscapes,
(b) the identification, interpretation, management and conservation of the park so as to maintain and enhance significant landscape values,
(c) the conservation of natural and cultural values,
(d) the promotion of public appreciation and understanding of the regional park’s natural and cultural values,
(e) provision for sustainable visitor use and enjoyment that is compatible with the conservation of the regional park’s natural and cultural values,
(f) provision for the sustainable use (including adaptive reuse) of any buildings or structures or modified natural areas having regard to the conservation of the regional park’s natural and cultural values.

Possibly our early call for a Regional Park was misguided as Lend Lease adopted our idea to counter opposition to their development plans. We are now opposed to the creation of a Regional Park because of a range of obvious reasons, including:

  • A Regional Park would only work if there was no urban development - 5000 houses and factories are proposed

  • The majority of the land zoned as Regional Park is highly endangered bushland supporting fragile ecosystems. 

  • 828 hectares of the the Regional Park is listed in the Register of the National Estate because of its conservation significance.

  • Regional Parks imply extensive human intervention. It is not an adequate reserve classification to protect an area of such environmental significance.

  • The area set aside for Regional Park is a sad compromise leaving large areas of Cumberland Plain vegetation exposed to development - NPWS mapping identifies that the proposed RP does not contain all Core and Support to Core Habitat. 10% of Core Habitat is to be developed.

  • Lend Lease, the State Government, Penrith and Blacktown Councils are supporting a RP that allows various recreational and economic uses. Lend Lease are pushing for unrestricted public access to the RP. 

We have urged the State Government to rezone the conservation area as a Nature Reserve as this would offer a greater level of protection to the sites remaining conservation values.

 

The above picture is a predicted final map of the ADI Site development. It reflects the the decision by the Federal Government in 2001 to protect all 828 hectares of the site listed by the Australian Heritage Commission (AHC) in the Register of the National Estate. Prior to this decision the NSW Governments SREP 30 had only zoned 630 hectares as Regional Park. The SREP 30 Regional Park zoning included 74 hectares of non-AHC listed land (source-Blacktown Council). Therefore by adding this 74 hectares to the 828 hectares that was AHC listed the final conservation area should be 902 hectares.

After the 2001 decision a Regional Park of 900 hectares (rounded figures) was promoted by all levels of government as being created. 

However, the St Marys Development Agreement, a legal agreement between the State Government, Federal Government and Lend Lease stated otherwise. As you can see on the above map the green areas are meant to be Regional Park, However in the western half of the map you will see areas that are shaded a lighter green (these are the bumpy bits). These areas have now been lumped into a category called Residual National Estate Land . They are AHC listed lands but because they have irregular shaped boundaries the St Marys Development Agreement allows the NSW Government the option to chop these areas off potentially reducing the size of the RP that they will create by as much as 50 hectares. 

Why is this the case? How can they get away with this?

The area set aside as Regional Park was previously owned by the Federal Government. Before the Federal Government sold the ADI site to Lend Lease it had led the public to believe it had ensured that land set aside for Regional Park conservation and Regional Open Space would be transferred to the NSW Government for it to manage as public land. Substantial funding would be offered to the State as an incentive for them to take over management of the land. 

In 2002 the State Government and the Developers entered into a legal agreement, the St Marys Development Agreement. This agreement spelt out financial and other obligations of the parties involved in developing the ADI Site. Under this agreement the developer is to provide funds to the State for the management of the Regional Park and Regional Open Space. (see St Marys Development Agreement pdf 554kb)

DEC struck a deal with Lend Lease to provide $6.9 million for the Regional Park however it was revealed later that DEC wanted almost $10 million to properly manage the Park. This funding shortfall appears to be why the St Marys Development Agreement allows the Environment Minister an option to shrink the Regional Park. A smaller Regional Park with smoother manageable boundaries will, in the long run, cost NPWS less to manage. 

If anything was gained by ADI RAG and others in this campaign it was the protection of over 900 hectares of the site. It has been a victory of sorts but by any measure the environmental values of this place have been compromised by all levels of government for short term economic gain. 

Again the 900 hectares that is meant to be protected is under threat from the developers and the State Government. 

It is no secret that Lend Lease, Penrith and Blacktown Councils are supportive of a wide variety of recreational uses within the Regional Park. The St Marys Development Agreement, the document that seems to dictate planning outcomes, has a clause in it that the principle of economic sustainability must be given due consideration by those developing a Plan of Management for the RP. This will involve:

  1. the development of the RP to minimise capital and maintenance costs,

  2. the making of capital improvements to maximise employment and training opportunities,

  3. maximising the opportunities to access external funding and grants for the RP and,

  4. the identification of appropriate revenue generating opportunities relating to the RP and the use of the revenue to offset the capital and maintenance costs of the RP.

This is scary stuff, and one must wonder if DEC is serious about protecting Cumberland Plain vegetation or exploiting it. One can almost picture a wedding reception centre or a horse riding school in the RP.

ADI RAG is on the Community Reference Group which is in the process of drafting a Plan of Management for the RP. ADI RAG sees this process as a tokenistic effort at community consultation but nonetheless we have decided to have input in order to keep the bastards honest. 

The public will have a chance to comment on the draft PoM when it is released, which we believe will be in 2006

«top