While council laments a missed growth opportunity and customers curse the lack of competition in the local hardware sector, there’s little doubt the decision has helped dodge a bitter spat between objectors and council.

It would have been ugly. It would have been divisive. And, ultimately, it would have been damaging to both council and the Masters brand.

From the moment Masters lodged its first development application, the dogs were barking about the inappropriateness of the site.

Slated for a flood plain on a main arterial road and just metres from suburban homes, the hardware giant would also have been forced to physically move a billabong to accommodate the store.

Commercially, the location made some sense, sandwiched between the city’s southern growth corridor and the affluent eastern fringe.

But as a sensible development, it failed on almost every other front.

Employment and competition are both vital to the future of our city and the council should be commended for embracing opportunities as they arise.

Growth must, however, be underpinned by sound planning principles.

And in this instance, the vast majority of locals believe it was not.

*****

THERE could scarcely be a more potent symbol of the uneasy peace between farmers and miners in the region than the Shenhua project on the Liverpool Plains.

That uneasy peace is about to descend into war, however, after the Planning Assessment Commission yesterday approved a controversial open-cut coalmine for Breeza.

Just two months out from a state election, mining on the Plains’ fertile black soil is even more of a powderkeg issue.

While Tamworth MP Kevin Anderson has staunchly opposed mining in the area, he cannot resile from the fact his government is responsible for the planning structure that approved this mine.

It would be naive for anyone to believe the mine will not bring with it serious short-term financial benefits for the communities of the North West.

The question remains – does that compensate for the potential damage it could wreak?