Eat Street to eat up Cleveland CBD carparks

Eat Street Site Plan in report to council meeting on 10 August 2016

Permanently placed shipping containers will reduce availability of carparks at Cleveland Library

Controversial plans for an “Eat Street” type market to operate in the car park behind Cleveland Library will be considered by Redland City Council on 10 August.

The proposal is for a number of food and drink outlets to operate from facilities in the Cleveland Library car park for three days each week – Friday to Sunday.

Nearby residents have opposed the Eat Street plan saying the location is unsuitable. Existing Cleveland traders say the new competition, operating only on their busiest days, would make it harder for them to survive.

Hog’s Breath Cafe national operations manager Paul Piert said more than 50 restaurants operated in the district and they were already struggling, according to a Bulletin report.

The Council has already signed an agreement with 4 Simplicity Pty Ltd for a five year lease of the car park with the option of a five year extension if mutually agreed. The financial terms of this deal have not been been made publicly available.

It’s not clear when this agreement was signed and who authorised it on behalf of the Council. This decision effectively ruled out any chance for the community to have a say about plans for changing the use of this public land.

During the local government election caretaker period, Council CEO Bill Lyon signed an owner’s consent on 1 March 2016 which allowed the proponents to submit a code assessible development application, MCU013700, not subject to public consultation.

Loss of Cleveland CBD carparks and other issues

The proposal will result in loss of 19 carparks behind the Cleveland Library. While the proposed markets will only operate from Friday to Sunday each week, a number of shipping containers will be placed permanently in the Library car park.

The officers report says that 14 of these carparks are currently allocated to council fleet vehicles which can instead use other Council carparks in the CBD.

The report does not address the cumulative impact of planned developments on CBD car parking, such as the nearby Cleveland train station development plans where it’s proposed that 124 apartments be constructed without carparks for use by visitors.

Other issues considered by officers in their assessment include noise, odour and amenity. They have recommended that the application be approved with condiditions.

Meeting details

The officers report on this application is item 11.2.3 of the publicly available meeting agenda.

The meeting will be held at Council’s chambers in Bloomfield Street on Wednesday 10 August, commencing at 9:30 am.

Members of the public can observe proceedings from the public gallery.

 

Redlands2030 – 8 August 2016

Please note: Offensive or off-topic comments will be deleted. If offended by any published comment please email thereporter@redlands2030.net

11 thoughts on “Eat Street to eat up Cleveland CBD carparks

  1. I guess now it’s in. I object to it, and will continue to provide my Custom to the existing places which continue to struggle. I just don’t see how this added competition can help.

  2. Oh yes The council can’t come up with a plausible plan to guarantee weekly trade for The main Bloomfield st.
    I note that there is a number of good little shops already there now (I can eat only so many gelatos and afagatos as it is.) Go into these shops during the business week and then compare their customers to that of those nearest the centre. This project will move that trade.

  3. Oh for the love common sense and reality. Strip shopping is virtually dead! Thanks to the avariciousness of the middle men shopping centre developers and dare I say it the short attention span of the public.
    The reality is that shopping centres are built to distort sales towards the “majors” & larger players ( chain stores). One only needs to look at any centre and most of the retailer usually over 40% are the chain shop. The smaller independents pay higher rents per Sq Metre and either demand trading figures and or a % of the till… and/or they up the rent by the %+ CPI, costs etc during the contracted period.
    They also only need 40% occupancy to make money. Clearly the most profitable businesses are the endless flow of hopeful small traders who think they will be the exception.
    Sadly most simply haemorrhage or work ridiculous hours for way less than they could make as employees. Franchises are often in the middle ground keeping some the rent savings, controlling suppliers ( kick backs or being the only supplier) plus % of till etc.
    Fact: Queensland has the highest percentage of shopping centres to people in the World
    My point is with all this is that choice is controlled and limited and it squeezes the outside strip shops. simply put the passing trade dwindles the further you are from the centre.
    I have in the decades in the Redlands have watched the small ( street/strip) shops change far too often to make a profit/ reasonable living ( given the hrs worked the capital at risk etc).
    Oh yes and I’ve seen the permanent jobs in the small self sufficient traders turn into part time ( read under employment for bread winners and exploitation of the pocket money brigade … see The fast food awards ).
    Sadly we have a series of under qualified councillors who now believe they can change the tide by more street cafes…. bollocks! The Council employees are there to do what the council tells them. Not to evaluate the viabilities etc. Therefore those with vested interests existing businesses and developers promote their self interests
    In reality These shops will need trade during the week to maintain their existence. The proposed street cafes need a business model that allows them to profit on the the partying, recreational demographics hmm! Attack the centres ( a necessity to stay open) lunch trade and watch out. The other alternative is night trade etc only … there again the problems mount.
    CONCLUSION. The whole proposal is a unthought through social disaster from the perspective of the average Redlands resident. It’s banking on the Toondah Harbour unit dwellers without it it makes little or any rational sense.

    • You are soo right. I am a small local business in Cleveland S/C. For 23 years, trade was good but I have seen my trade spiral down because of the major chain stores and unrealistic rents.
      Centre management do not want to help us, you just have to see all the empty shops, we all try to survive but they are pushing us out. So much for supporting the small Australian business. WHAT A JOKE

  4. The idea that competition is a good thing has a small amount of merit however enough is enough.

    Is it more important to generate a buck for a new business or to help an existing business improve? Where is the value in insolvency? Sadly personal insolvencies rose to 13.7% in the June quarter 2016!

    This is the price of competition that more and more is a race to the bottom. Eat street markets often employ casual labour. The rise in casual and part time employment is at the heart of the growing divide between the haves and have not’s. We as a society have to make our choice soon as to the type and nature of our society.

    When do those whose only employment is ‘casual’ ever get to have a mortgage – banks don’t loan on casual employment? When do these people every get to have some security of employment?

    We now have the new class called the working poor.

    The working poor are people who spend 27 weeks or more in a year “in the labor force” either working or looking for work but whose incomes fall below the poverty level.

    In 2013, 4.4 million Australians who usually work full-time were working poor.

  5. At first glance, Eat Street seems to be a good idea. Then as one delves more deeply into it, the myriad of problems emerge – such as transparency re leasing car park, any “study” into the implications or consequences of Eat Street on the viability of existing restaurants in Cleveland.

    Given the current economic climate where many small businesses are doing it tough, they need the support of council. These businesses are not likely to be able to withstand any council decision which undermines their economic viability. The concept of Eat Street may be a wonderful idea to give young chefs some exposure, but is the right time and place to implement the concept?

  6. When was the leasing availability of a council (ratepayers) car park advertised? When and where was the decision made to lease the car park? Who made the decision to lease the car park?

  7. So the Council put their own land into the market place (and that process seems blurred) and gives one proponent the inside running with a lease, development consent and presumably an appealable right. Talk about a give away!

    How do the traders that provide a 7 days a week service and 7 days a week jobs feel about having to compete with Council and a proponent that picks the eyes out of the trading week?

    And the assessment report is confused and so equivocal … on that score alone the Council should defer or refuse the application. Surely the assessment officer can do better?

    Council has a buy local policy too…did it carry any weight?

    BTW Ive heard there are over 70 businesses that will be effected. If even 5% close the exercise would be zero sum…is there any evidence on which to base this decision in terms of economic impact? Clearly the assessment officers don’t or won’t look at viability.

  8. Whilst I like the idea of an Eat Street style market this is the wrong place and space for it. Food establishments are already suffering in Cleveland. This market is simply motivated by making money for the organizer if there was not a dollar in it the motivation would be gone. It’s as simple as that. The issue is Councillors listen to the what there told and do not have a rational thought for themselves and end up rubber stamping whatever comes along. We elect Councillors to fulfill the consensus of public opinion not to oppose it. When money gets in the way the Council is to eager to say yes. I think to many people simply feel like they no longer have say in this country.

  9. So many whinge about the lack of infrastructure in the Redlands, but it’s the same voices saying “Bring on Eat Street,” even though parking will be a nightmare, and the desolation which is elsewhere in Cleveland will get worse.

  10. Considering the success of eat Street in the city and the vibrancy of the event walking a little bit hasn’t hurt anyone. I also think healthy competition is a good thing. Outside of all the development that is occurring a bit of culinary fun is in order 😀

Comments are closed.