Jump to content

Luna Park Sydney court case ruling


Recommended Posts

Locals lose battle against Luna Park From Sydney Morning Herald website February 6, 2009 - 8:39PM Attempts by a group of Sydney residents to shut down noisy rides at nearby Luna Park have failed in the NSW Supreme Court. The Lavender Bay residents had taken the amusement park operator to court, trying to have rides like the Ranger shut down and moved to another part of the site. They said the rides' noise levels and the screaming thrill-seekers had made life unbearable since the park reopened in 2004. But in a judgment handed down in the NSW Supreme Court today, Justice Paul Brereton dismissed claims the rides contravened a 1998 Plan of Management for the site or, therefore, the Crown Lands Act. He also dismissed claims the park operator, Luna Park Sydney (LPS), and its parent company Metro Edgley had engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct. The residents said they were led to believe the rides would not be located at the northern extension of the park. "The 2001 DA (development application) and 2002 DA were not misleading or deceptive," Justice Brereton said. LPS managing director Peter Hearne welcomed the court's decision, saying the amusement park was part of Sydney's heritage. "It is unreasonable for people to move next door to a legally operating fun park and expect to change the way it operates," he said. "The fact of the matter is Luna Park makes less noise than previous fun parks on the site and less noise than we ever said we would." Mr Hearne said LPS had spent millions defending the action, and would apply for costs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sucked in to those locals. The park has been there long before they were, and long before those buildings were built. and why dont they just move, if they can afford to live there right near sydney harbour, they could afford to live sumwhere else than live looking at a theme park. i have always been against these people whinging about the noise of the park, what do they expect, people scream, rides r loud, they should just learn to live with it or piss off!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think their grounds for complaint, or at least part of it, was that when the park closed for a long time in 1979 it was neighboured by office buildings rather than residential towers like now but it's good that the counter argument that the site was always designated for an amusement park even if one wasn't operating at times prevailed. Always good to see a bunch of whiny upper class bitches not get their way once in a while. But will Luna Park invest in more rides? I doubt it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You would imagine that even if they had wanted to invest in more rides up until this point, they would not have done so with the pending court case (in light of what happened with the Big Dipper ride which led to the closure of the park) and this would have been compounded with the cost of being in court for the four or so years the case was running (you'd imagine that in itself would have cost millions). So in light of this i'm not sure it's fair to say that they haven't wanted to invest in more rides- I wouldn't have either if I was them... but now it's a different story. It'll be interesting to see where they go from here

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tony, see this link http://maps.google.com.au/maps?f=q&sou...mp;t=h&z=16 and tell me exactly where you are gunna fit a woodie in - remembering of course that coney island (at the north end) and crystal ballroom (on the south western shorefront) are both heritage listed buildings. I'm not having a go mate - but while they might have been able to fit in some good stuff in the past, it would require a massive re-work of the area, now that the new parking centre etc is there too.

Edited by AlexB
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is exactly my stance on things. Like people who built their houses next to the old Darlington Prak Raceway. That was an F1 grade race track that has now been shut down and being used for industrial area. I don't think it will be long before people start complaining about Willowbank etc. Is there one of these happening for Movieworld? I reckon if people find a cheap house (or in the case of sydney, a rather expensive one) that can't really expect to not hear the park. Besides, if they went to their house inspection on any day other than Christmas, the would pf heard the park nearby (or even seen it if it wasn't operating). I think the judge has made the right decision for this case. Pity it's taken so long to go through though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You would imagine that even if they had wanted to invest in more rides up until this point, they would not have done so with the pending court case (in light of what happened with the Big Dipper ride which led to the closure of the park) and this would have been compounded with the cost of being in court for the four or so years the case was running (you'd imagine that in itself would have cost millions). So in light of this i'm not sure it's fair to say that they haven't wanted to invest in more rides- I wouldn't have either if I was them... but now it's a different story. It'll be interesting to see where they go from here
Good point, but I'm in 2 minds, they had to win this court case top keep a goos part of the park operating at all but here's hoping they do something with the park now. I'd love them to build the park into an Indianan Beach style park.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.