Cleveland station needs parking not apartments

The Cleveland train station as visualised in the Cleveland Centre Master Plan.

Cleveland train station as visualised in the 2010 Cleveland Centre Master Plan not yet given planning force.

Plans for development of a mainly residential project in the northern car park of the Cleveland train station were considered at Redland City Council’s meeting on 25 January.

Most councillors recognised that the community was unhappy with the proposed development’s inadequate provisions for commuter car parking.

Community views were clearly expressed as comments to a recent post on the Redlands2030 Facebook page.

But the issue of commuter car parking was precluded from discussion by councillors, being a matter that is under the control of the State’s Labor Government.

For the matters which it was able to deal with, the proposed development of a residential apartment complex and a small kiosk, the Council decided to adopt an alternative motion proposed by Cr Tracey Huges which gave the developer a preliminary approval subject to two conditions:

  • Provision of extra car parks to cover the needs of visitors to the residential apartments (one visitor car park for every four units)
  • Retention of a large gum tree next to the Station which the developer has proposed to remove.

Crs Mitchell, Gollé, Edwards, Elliott, Huges, Talty and Williams voted FOR the motion.

Crs Boglary, Hewlett, Gleeson and Bishop voted AGAINST the motion.

Public presentations about development at Cleveland train station

Presentations about the Cleveland train station project were made by two members of the community which can be viewed on the council’s video recording:

Mr A. Carlton of  the Villa Edgewater Body Corporate raised concerns about loss of privacy, removal of trees and lack of parking. His speech commences at 45:25 minutes.

Mr John Derbyshire of Cleveland said that the project was a poorly conceived transit oriented development (TOD) which councillors should not approve. His speech commences at 49:30 minutes.

Cleveland Centre Master Plan

Discussion of the Cleveland train station project established that:

  • There is a Cleveland Centre Master Plan, adopted by Redland City Council in 2010, which deals with the nature of development in the Cleveland CBD including issues such as car parking.
  • This Master Plan has not been incorporated into the current Redlands Planning Scheme so its provisions do not automatically apply when Council is considering development applications.
  • Interestingly, in 2014 the previous Council adopted some elements of the Cleveland Centre Master Plan e.g. building heights in a package of amendments to the current Redlands Planning Scheme. But not the bits that would impose requirements for car parking.
  • The Draft City Plan 2015, prepared by the previous Council (which received considerable negative feedback from the community) also did not incorporate the Cleveland Centre Master Plan.

The effect of this cherry picking by the previous council has been to allow development of tall buildings with inadequate car parking in the Cleveland CBD.

Anyone concerned about the way in which Redland City Council deals with its town planning responsibilities should be questioning their local councillor about the non-adoption of the Cleveland Centre Master Plan.

Temporary parking during construction work at the Station

The officers report to Council said up to 78 car parks would be made available at RPAC at the developer’s cost while the train station’s northern car park was unavailable during construction. It became apparent during the Council meeting that details such as providing a safe pedestrian route between the temporary car park at RPAC and the Cleveland train station have not yet been considered in detail.

Mark Robinson (LNP) says more commuter parking needed

Mark Robinson (LNP), state MP for Cleveland, has reiterated his opposition to the project saying that any development on this site should provide much more commuter car parking.

In August 2016 he told State Parliament:

The redevelopment of Cleveland station should have brought much extra commuter parking—that was the original plan—but the very low number has created angst amongst residents who live in the immediate vicinity and those who utilise the station for their daily commute.

My consultations with the community have revealed high levels of objection to this development among nearby residents.

As an opposition MP, Dr Robinson can put forward his community’s views to the Government using methods such as:

  • Asking questions in parliament about this project
  • Initiating and/or sponsoring parliamentary petitions which oppose a project lacking community support

Mark Robinson’s contact details are:

Don Brown (Labor) says it’s a great return for the taxpayer

Don Brown (Labor), state MP for the neigbouring electorate of Capalaba and a member of the State Labor Government, has expressed his support for the Cleveland train station apartment project saying it would yield a “great return for taxpayers”.

But the economic benefits of this privatisation project have never been explained to the community by the Labor State Government.

As the self styled “de facto member for Cleveland” Don Brown is well placed to receive the views of those in the community who want the State Government do a better job of planning a transit oriented development with substantially improved commuter parking.

Don Brown’s contact details are:

Further reading (and viewing):

The proposed Cleveland station development was item 11.2.4 of the meeting minutes which can be downloaded from this Redland City Council webpage.

The discussion of this item can be viewed on the Council’s video recording starting at 104:35 minutes.

Redlands2030 broke the news about this proposed development 12 months ago and has continued to keep the community informed through stories on the Redlands2030 website.

Story in the Redland City Bulletin – 25 January 2017

Redlands2030 – 31 January 2017

Please note: Offensive or off-topic comments will be deleted. If offended by any published comment please email

5 thoughts on “Cleveland station needs parking not apartments

  1. Now that there has been a reshuffle in the Labor Govt, Deputy Premier Jackie Trad is now officially in charge of Transport. With 10,000 new residents soon to occupy many new housing estates in Redlands adding to thousands of new vehicles on our already congested roads, feel certain Ms Trad will have the necessary expertise at hand to ease the a.m. rush hour traffic leaving the Redlands on a daily basis. Capalaba’s Finucane Rd a.m. traffic is backed up from 4-way intersection at Old Cleveland/Mt Cotton Rds to Windemere Rd Alex Hills & informed road rage has been witnessed on crowded Mt Cotton Road. People everywhere are asking…’what are they (govt) going to do about the roads’! Many locals saw sign on Cleveland-Redland Bay Rd Thornlands during last local council election that read: “Williams Will fix this road”….now that Jackie Trad has Transport, council/State govt heavyweights will surely get the road fixed, finally to ensure safety for the travelling public…while at the same time, fixing the parking problem at Cleveland rail station. With continued urban sprawl, there is much to be done ASAP.

  2. How good to read above “Cleveland station needs parking not apartments”. What a change from hearing that the only problem with the development is that there is not enough parking!!! The problem is the totally inappropriate two nine storey towers!!!
    Following Mark Robinson’s speech in Parliament in which he stated “My consultations with the community have revealed high levels of objection to this development among nearby residents.
    Body Corporates around the area are very unhappy and object to it in its current form, particularly around the parking.” I wrote on 24/1/17 two emails to Mark re. not wanting the apartments at all to which he personally replied.
    I then followed up at 3.24pm on 3/2/17 with an email to Don Brown with much the same content as I had sent to Mark hoping to enlist his help. A mere 14 mins. later I was amazed to receive a reply as follows:
    “From: Capalaba Electorate Office
    Sent: Friday, February 3, 2017 3:38 PM
    To: ‘Ann & Tony Shellabear’
    Subject: RE: Cleveland Train Station Development
    Good Afternoon Ann,
    Thank you for raising this matter, the development in Cleveland will deliver more carparks for the Cleveland Railway Station. With these carparks only being usable by commuters as they will require the use of Go Cards to enter. If someone parked there with a Go Card but did not travel to another station then they’d be charged for parking there.
    The design of the building itself falls within Redland City Council’s jurisdiction and should be raised with your local Councillor.
    Michael Nelson
    Assistant Electorate Officer”

    Do I need to say anymore?? I think the email speaks for itself….. “A great return for taxpayers..?????.” Pity no one listens to the taxpayers!!!
    Oh, the irony of it all!

  3. Cleveland residents do not want two high rise buildings as entrance to Cleveland Harbour. We now have trees followed by views of the park and harbour. Why should we have our approach spoiled and residents lose their privacy because of these proposed buildings.

  4. What a high density condensed mess!!
    Forget the appartments what about the second rail track that has been put on hold so Williams sicophants can clip the ticket on unwanted development.
    Laming, Robertson, Mackechan and Williams are not saying a thing towards getting the Rail timetable sorted for Working constituents that use the rail service to and from Cleveland. But they are trying to build apartments over a rail station that facilitates a disfunctional rail service to the city. Go figure, rail timetables are for the real people that work for a living and don’t steal from the public.

Comments are closed.