Given the limitations of the site from a commercial development point of view (clearly reflected in the negative result of the tender process), the BVSRRA believes that council will be highly unlikely to negotiate a sale price for the land above $1.5millon.

Meanwhile everyone knows that Merimbula is choking as no new parking stock has been added to the town for more than 30 years, not to forget that the Rawson supermarket development will shortly see the loss of around 180 existing car spaces for 12 months or more.

The fact is that the old library site in Main Street is the only site in Merimbula where substantial public parking could be made available without having to construct a high rise facility. The BVSRRA believes the site could provide up to 90 parking spaces, would make a significant contribution towards overcoming the town’s parking shortage and avoid the significant impact of the loss of town car parking during the construction phase of the Rawson project.

While council has said the proceeds of the sale of the old library site would be used to fund more parking, the cost of every high rise parking space is estimated to be $40,000, which means to replicate the 90 spaces already potentially available from simply converting the existing Main Street site to a public car park, the council would have to find another $2.1 million in funding on top of the $1.5 million from the sale: a total of $3.6 million. Therefore it would need to sell the old library site for at least $3.6 million to fund the construction of a high rise car park providing the same number of spaces.

The BVSRRA believes that a far smarter move would be to demolish the existing buildings on the old library site and convert it into a free public car park by laying a line-marked bitumen surface while, at the same time, avoiding the negative aspects of high rise parking on users and the community.

While council would forgo the proceeds of the land sale, it would overcome a major parking problem which is restricting its potential to respond to any tourism growth, while not facing the difficulty of having to ask residents/ratepayers to come-up with more money to fund an equivalent high rise solution; which is not likely to be in-keeping with the amenity of the town.

John Richardson, Bega Valley Shire Residents & Ratepayers Association

More contempt from SERH and Andrew Constance for residents living outside Bega, nice photo opportunity last week at new hospital but re bus service, we have a commitee working on this and there will be two additional daily services at weekends. Not good enough

Beverley Mcdowell, Pambula

It didn’t take long for John Richardson to leap into print again arguing against a Bunnings for Tura Beach. Richardson should recognise that Tura Beach residents actually want a Bunnings sited opposite Woolworths. The News Weekly ran a Facebook poll last year and received 88 per cent support for Bunnings at Tura Beach.

The argument provided by Richardson is based on his support of the “numerous planning requirements of the Bega Valley Shire LEP, the NSW Department of planning Policy for Tura Beach, Bega Valley Shire Council town hierarchy and commercial strategy and the South Coast Regional Strategy”. Old planning schemes and strategies need to be reviewed and updated to accommodate the changing demographics of places like Tura Beach, in particular.  

Chris Young, Tura Beach