Lake Macquarie council has effectively deferred a decision on a proposed standard remedial action plan which residents surrounding the former Pasminco smelter would have to follow when developing their properties.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The plan, which had been criticised by affected residents for making a "blanket assumption" that more than 2300 properties around the former smelter site were polluted, returned for endorsement at Monday night's ordinary council meeting.
With only 10 of the 13 councillors in attendance, an amendment to defer a decision on endorsing the plan was carried by deputy mayor Nick Jones' casting vote, but he dropped his support when it was voted on as the motion.
The situation resulted in no official resolution on the matter and leaves the proposed changes up in the air until at least the next council meeting in February.
The aim of the plan was to make it easier for residents to submit development applications by providing a standardised method of dealing with contamination.
But residents are still left the hefty cost, in the tens of thousands of dollars, to dispose of contaminated soil.
The draft plan was exhibited between May and August. Affected residents held community meetings during that time advocating for state government funding to help pay for clean up costs.
Cr Jason Pauling moved the amendment to defer adopting the plan until there was a "clear and permanent solution" for the disposal of contaminated soil.
He said it would be wrong to adopt the plan given an agreement between the Environment Protection Authority and Newcastle council to allow contaminated soil to be dumped at Summerhill tip was soon due to end and residents had not had a touted second meeting with the NSW Environment Minister.
READ MORE: Pollution grant funding labelled pittance
"Council's intentions are admirable," he said. "This is an attempt to fix the pathway for people seeking to develop their land ... but I don't think it's appropriate at this time."
Cr Kevin Baker seconded the amendment, saying the matter needed to be "discussed and thought through more".
Cr Brian Adamthwaite, who moved the original motion to adopt the plan, said "disposal was a problem" but that would not change "regardless of whether we approve this or not".
READ MORE: Calls to help homeowners in pollution battle
"But by approving this we actually make it easier for people," he said.
"People who want to do an extension have an opportunity to do it faster."
As proposed in the original motion, Cr Christine Buckley said council could "continue to lobby" the state government to help fund disposal of contaminated soil and still approve the plan, but Cr John Gilbert said that was little more than "lip service".
Cr David Belcher described the amendment to defer as "kicking the can down the road indefinitely".
