Park sale and heritage loss upset residents in Redland City

Letter to the editor

This week’s mailbag continues the rage from locals angered at Council’s proposal to turn 16 parks into development opportunities.

One writer asks if councillors ever stop to think what is it about the Redlands that presently makes it so liveable, likeable and lovable? Another says it’s time to dispose of the current council.

Other writers focus on the “trashing” of heritage in the Redlands. It seems that heritage signs are no guarantee of protection and the historic 1889 Cleveland Station Master’s cottage is about to be moved – to make way for 19 more car spaces at the RSL Club.

If you have something to say, and you want to say it to a lot of people, send an email to:

Dispose of the Council, not the parklands

Residents discussing Council's plans to rezone 53 Fisher Road, Thorneside

Residents discussing Council’s plans to rezone 53 Fisher Road, Thorneside

The proposal to “dispose” of parklands in Redland City should be the trigger that “disposes” of this current Council.

Parks are dedicated or set aside in specific locations for very sound reasons. When a development occurs, the impact on the density of the surrounding population dictates a very important planning decision. That is, how much public use land will be required to support the increase in population that will result from this development.

The land is either dedicated as park under the provisions of the Land Act 1994, or held as freehold by the Council for and on behalf of the people in the community.

In addition, some parkland can result from a donation by persons who donate on the basis that it will be park FOREVER. And, some parkland can be acquired using taxpayers money as the land may be deemed to have significant environmental or cultural values.

Whichever way it becomes park, it is entrusted to Council or Government for and on behalf of the community. Entrusted means “held in trust” which means Council must be able to be “trusted” to hold community land forever.

Clearly there is a serious breach of trust being enacted by this Council. Therefore voters must vote them out and make it very clear through public opinion that any future Council that proposes the same action will be dealt with in the same way.

Lyn Payne, Cleveland

Keep the Redlands green

Alexandra Hills residents discussing Council's plans for rezoning and sale of parks

Alexandra Hills residents discussing Council’s plans for rezoning and sale of parks

Thank you for the opportunity for any resident to comment about rezoning parks in Redland City.

How could any Councillor in their right mind consider removing from the Redlands the ‘green’ that makes the Redlands what it is?

Do they ever stop to think what is it about the Redlands that presently makes it so liveable, likeable and lovable?

What category of permanent resident do they wish to encourage here?

The erection of 2-3 storey slum dwellings or ghettos enclosed behind barricades (yes,that’s what these habitats will be in 10 years time) on every green patch that ever graced this pleasant and peaceful Moreton Bay coastline, will be to this Council’s eternal shame.

Lying to ratepayers and treating their constituents like dirt – enough is enough.

March 2016 – bring it on!


Heather Hagen, Redland City

Heritage buildings should not be moved

The Station Master's Cottage in Middle Street, Cleveland

The Station Master’s Cottage in Middle Street, Cleveland

I am dismayed at the council decision to approve the removal of the Cleveland Station Master’s cottage from its site on Middle Street in Cleveland. Cleveland RSL have been given permission to remove this piece or Redland’s heritage for a car park for 19 cars.

The Williams council is well known for its disregard for heritage and has no City-wide heritage plan so this philistine decision is to be expected. This building could have been protected by council years ago but since 2002 Redlands has steadfastly refused to list privately owned building for protection.

However it is most disappointing that the RSL, an organisation that prides itself on preserving history, has chosen to trash our local heritage. It is no longer acceptable to remove heritage buildings. It is to be hoped that a public outcry can shame the RSL into doing what are shameful council does not – and that is to leave this building in place.

M Hardy, Redland City

Heritage signs aren’t what they seem

Only one of these three properties has heritage protection

Only one of these three properties has heritage protection

I have attached three photos of heritage signs in Cleveland to prove a shocking point.

Here’s the kicker: only one of these valuable buildings is actually protected in any way (The Grand View). The other two and many more like them could be demolished tomorrow.

Also in that category is the Station Master’s Residence built in 1889 (beside the RSL).

Could you please show these photos and alert people to this fact?

Council has:
• NO heritage plan.
• NO heritage staff.
Put it all together and we nave NO HERITAGE LEFT!

We need to make a loud noise about this.

Gwen Hollyman, Redland City

Further information

Secretive plans for rezoning and sale of 16 parks revealed in Draft City Plan

Redland Council should protect our heritage

Redland City Council’s Draft City Plan 2015 website


Redlands2030 – 5 November 2015

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

4 thoughts on “Park sale and heritage loss upset residents in Redland City

  1. Times have changed haven’t they? Willard Homestead built in mid-1800’s was earmarked for a housing estate about to be demolished when Env Min Miles along with Member for Capalaba Don Brown in the nick of time stopped demolition and today is under protection and heritage listed? It is to be hoped restoration takes place and becomes a welcoming place for tourists and locals alike. There is a need in Redlands for interesting places to attract people to be developed with care. This is the ideal location alongside the Commonwealth land that must not, no not ever, fall into the hands of local grubby greedy local developers to build wall to wall housing estates, many of us know who they are, having seen their photo jumping up and down on the Commonwealth land in Bayside Bulletin some time ago. Now that RCC heavyweights have seen the light so to speak, adopting a long awaited accountable and transparent policy listening and hearing views and wishes of the people of Redlands they are well paid to represent, this highly valuable land must be for the people, all of the people, of all ages to be a welcoming place to visit, well planned, embracing a natural enhanced environment while rejecting any form of a destructive built one.

  2. Well said ‘Me Too’. When I talk to people from other areas outside The Redlands and tell them how this Council is selling our parks to developers their reaction is ‘they can’t do that!’. ‘Oh yes they can’ is my reply because that is just what this Council is doing. Each year we pay an Environmental Levy to look after parkland and conservation areas but apparently it’s not enough and Council says they can’t afford to look after so much parkland. Well who’s fault is that? Who promised to cut Tip Fees and and lower Environmental levies and cut rates to get into Council at the last election? We all know the answer to that so what is this Mayor going to promise to make sure she gets elected in March next year? I dread to think but I really hope and pray that we can vote in a new Council, one that really believes in the Redlands Community Plan, written by the people, for the people.

  3. Dispose of the Council, not the parklands…says the heading.
    Perhaps even better if you could weave in ” Waste of Space” too.
    Majority of council that is.
    it can’t be said that the mayoral leadership has united the team or taken community along in the conversations.

Comments are closed.