Over 2,000 people recently signed parliamentary petitions objecting to plans for Toondah Harbour. The Government’s response provoked this response from Redlands resident Margaret Hardy.
Letter to Jackie Trad
Dear Minister Trad
Thank you for forwarding your response to the Clerk of Parliament for petitions 2561-16, 2562-16 and 2537-16 regarding the proposed development of Toondah Harbour.
I must take issue with some of your responses.
1. There is no relationship between the arrangements made with Walker Corporation and Redland City Council (RCC) and the Redlands 2030 Community Plan (2030 Plan). At no time did the 2030 Plan envisage the ceding of an extensive area of Moreton Bay to a commercial enterprise. The 2030 Plan’s vision was for a Healthy Natural Environment; Green Living; Embracing the Bay; Wise Planning and Design and Inclusive and Ethical Governance. The Toondah PDA violates every part of this vision.
2. The extensive public consultation of the Toondah PDA including 10 community forums; 583 online submissions; five community mailouts and advertisements and public displays was for the upgrading of ferry facilities and parking with a development of 800 residential units. The commercial agreement signed by Walker and RCC exploded this number of units to 3600. This was never viewed by the community.
3. The Walker proposal aims to replace a natural treed, grassy park; a beach fringed with mangroves and a vista across the bay to the islands with a concrete boardwalk and a vista of multi-storey units and a marina. This is neither equitable nor in line with community expectations. A hectare of parkland does not equate to a hectare of concrete boardwalk.
4. The selection of the Walker Group as developer was made behind closed doors and other alternatives were not available for community scrutiny. The constant use of ‘commercial in confidence’ to hide decisions made by Local and State governments is abhorrent to the community.
5. Minister, you submit that the developer will have to meet rigorous environmental standards. What standard is the Queensland Government
applying when it supports a development that will destroy an internationally gazetted RAMSAR site? This is a deal-breaker.
6. Independent scrutiny of the gain in parking for the community shows that there will be no net increase in parking from this proposed development and in fact there is likely to be a net loss. To include street parking as part of any gain is deceitful.
7. You further suggest that the ‘gift’ of $116 million of new public infrastructure is a win for our community. So you are equating $116 million with the value of an iconic park with a koalas and a RAMSAR site? These public assets of park and bay are priceless. What standard is being applied when a government donates 49.5 hectares of Moreton Bay to a developer? What is the dollar value of such an area of waterfront land? This in no way appears to be a win for the community. The community clearly places a higher intrinsic value on
the environment than that of your government.
This is a disgusting and degrading Faustian deal that the community will not tolerate. I call upon the State government to rescind the PDA; assert that the whole of Moreton Bay is environmentally valuable and is not open to private enterprise and that all the Redland community requires is an improved ferry terminal with parking. The concept that only the private sector can provide this is fundamentally flawed and better options can and must be found.
There is no shortage of available land in the Cleveland area for unit developments and so the destruction of the RAMSAR site is completely avoidable. The Walker Corporation plan is not the least destructive option.
This is not the best we can be.
Stop the Rort – Just fix the Port
If you are not happy with the current proposal for Toondah Harbour let the Governmemt know by signing this petition: Stop the Rort: Just fix the Port