Council archive · source document
PM Submission - Tom Whitaker - MCU25/0118
From: "Tom Whitaker" <[email protected]>
Sent: Sun, 23 Nov 2025 21:02:24 +1000
To: "Mailbox Council Mail" <[email protected]>
Subject: Submission for 64 lake MacDonald drive
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important
CAUTION: This email originated outside of Council. Do not open links or attachments
if the email is unexpected or unusual.
64 Lake MacDonald Drive has a number of significant issues that pose risks
and future safeguarding concerns for nearby residents and families, including
our own.
From the very beginning of this project, the process has felt like smoke and
mirrors from Council. Although the phrase “community consultation” is
constantly being used, it is very clear that this is merely a box-ticking
exercise rather than a genuine effort to engage with or provide any
meaningful service to the residents who actually pay the rates in this town.
Council’s website page for the development includes a subsection titled
Community Consultation, which states that a “letter” was sent to residents in
July 2022. Almost none of the residents received this letter. Even Glen
Conforti himself said, “It may have been an email,” yet Council still insists
that this counted as sufficient consultation.
After the meeting with residents—when councillors (4 vs 3) voted to proceed
with the development—residents were told that Lots 2 and 3 would be
subject to further community consultation. However, Frank Wilkie has since
stated publicly on radio that an additional 60 homes will be going on the lot,
or at least potentially. Is it any wonder why trust in local government has
dwindled?
Prior to the clearing of the land, residents expressed serious concerns about
potentially harmful dust and stormwater runoff during the remediation
process. How many times have councillors actually visited the lot or spoken
to residents to check how things are going? I have personally had one visitor
to my house who said she can literally taste the dust on windy days—and this
is evident from the works and how the dust (contaminated with asbestos) is
being handled. As someone who works in the construction industry, I was
Document Set ID: 24329284
Version: 1, Version Date: 24/11/2025
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalFull text of the other 2 pages
Page 2
shocked at how Council claimed the land would be remediated safely when I
know from personal experience that this is not completely possible.
Kim Rawlings (recorded) stated during an on-site meeting with the consultant
that Council would take any steps, no matter the cost, to keep residents safe.
However, when one resident asked to have the clearly visible dust on her
pool cover tested, she was told, “Sorry, it’s not in the budget.”
Since remediation began, there have been a number of moderate wet-weather
events—not unusual for this area—that have had significant effects on the
street. Contaminated dirt has spilled onto Dianella Court multiple times and,
when this occurs on weekends, it is left until Monday to be cleaned up. How
do the so-called biosphere climate activists on Council (such as Brian
Stockwell and Tom Wegner) consider this acceptable, especially given how
silent they have been throughout this entire process?
Being in construction, it is easy to see the potential harms of poor runoff
management—something Council itself acknowledges by employing
numerous plumbing inspectors. Yet when these questions were raised, I was
made to feel foolish and told to “trust the process.” The runoff at the back of
my property has increased dramatically since the removal of the tree canopy,
and I am expected to simply watch my property erode over the next decade.
The clustering of this many units, all of which are social or commission
housing, poses a substantial threat to the safety and wellbeing of my family
and our surrounding neighbours. Given that Frank Wilkie has already stated
publicly that Lots 2 and 3 will also be of the same nature and similarly dense,
where is the safety net for my family in terms of increased risk of crime and
general nuisance? It is well established that these types of developments often
bring additional challenges, and in this case, they put my family’s wellbeing
at risk—a path I strongly urge Council not to take.
I suggest councillors remember that they hold their positions because
residents like myself vote for them—and can just as easily vote them out.
Both Council staff and councillors are supposed to serve the wants and needs
of local ratepayers, yet throughout this entire process, it is clear that some
individuals are more focused on appeasing those they perceive as above them
rather than those who actually pay their wages.
Document Set ID: 24329284
Version: 1, Version Date: 24/11/2025
Page 3
This development has been a travesty from start to present and will have
overwhelmingly negative impacts on the town of Cooroy and the shire as a
whole.
Yours
Tom Whitaker
Sent from my iPhone
Document Set ID: 24329284
Version: 1, Version Date: 24/11/2025
Used in these records
PM Submission - Tom Whitaker - MCU25/0118Related documentApplication case desk ↗
About this file
- File size
- 125 KB (small file)
- File type
No other editions are linked here.