Letters about Toondah Harbour PDA plans

Letters about Toondah

Big Red Cat entering Toondah Harbour

Toondah PDA dominates letters this week.  The new referral proposal seems to have little logic other than to negate the previous submissions and force all submitters to go through the hoops again.  It has exposed that neither Redland City Council nor the State Government have officially seen or considered the new proposal.  This despite efforts of the Mayor and one Councillor to encourage submissions in favour of the new proposal.

Our elected officials calling on the community to make a submission is one thing.  Not ensuring the Council made a submission, and made it public,  seems to be at odds with that call for submissions in support of the 3600 residential development (to which the new proposal clearly aligns).

Toondah dreams are really nightmares

Dreams of grand development at Toondah Harbour emerged four times during my ten years as a councillor.

Any of these proposals, if approved, would have damaged not only Cassim Island but the waterfront too.  These works would have disbursed acid sulphate throughout Moreton Bay.  Acid sulphate is dangerous and is spread by dredging.

During my days as a professional fisherman I helped form our Environmental Committee which looked at issues from Tweed Heads to Tewantin.  The secret of our success was access to a highly regarded marine scientist.  That knowledge gave us a strong science input to a whole range of foreshore development schemes.

At Toondah, all proposals fell over and each of these attempts has lessons for the latest dream.

First, there was a plan by the barge company to use a cutter suction barge to increase the depth of the Fision Channel.  The main problem was the presence of acid sulphate and the risk it posed if disturbed.  Those plans came to an end and never happened again.

Second, there appeared a Queen Street company with the objective to shift the barge and ferry terminal to out in the bay.  At the end of a new harbour and to use Cassim Island for high rise development.

One day we saw on the horizon a barge, an excavator which took some samples of the island and found the island was totally useless for their operations.

We collected samples at the next low tide which again showed the acid sulphate was present.  In addition, the rocks that were there were 1-2 metres in size and appeared to have been rolled there from a long way away.

The Queen Street company disappeared and were never seen or heard of again.

Third, there came a group wanting to build a marina and high rise on the northern side of Cassim Island.  Again dredge samples showed acid sulphate and they could not find a hard base at a depth of over 50metres.  Too deep to drive poles.

Fourth, came the present operation that our councillors have signed over and that denies residents of the shire access to information that should be made available to residents.  I believe that the “cone of silence” surrounding this development will probably be the end of this council and these councillors….and rightly so.

After all they were elected by us so why is there need for a suspicious “cone of silence”.

I say there is no need for thousands of apartments in Moreton Bay.  The costs are too high.  The barge and ferry terminal needs a makeover – just do that.

Frank Bradley
Former Division 2 Councillor

Toondah Harbour is ludicrous

I am a marine biologist but you don’t need to be a biologist to see that the existing Toondah Harbour Proposal is ludicrous, both from the environmental point of view and from the infrastructure stand point. 

Have you ever been on a Stradbroke Island Ferry as it negotiates the twisting channel at low tide?  It has been situated in a very poor location. 

The site on the western side of Cleveland Point is much better located and does not involve so much environmental damage.

TF
Victoria Point

 

Who is conning who over Toondah

A totally new cruise ship terminal for the Gold Coast is estimated to cost $70 million!

Why then is an upgraded Toondah Harbour ferry terminal with facilities and extra parking going to cost $1.4 billion?

Is it because of the 3,600 dwellings the Walker Corporation plans on building mostly on reclaimed land in Moreton Bay?

What is the cost of fixing the Toondah facilities?

What the community wants and needs is an upgraded ferry terminal with facilities for tourists and extra parking, not a new suburb in the Bay, our greatest asset.

Seriously, stop the rort, just fix the port.

 

BD
Cleveland

 

Redlands2030 – 25 May 2017

 

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

3 thoughts on “Letters about Toondah Harbour PDA plans

  1. I haven’t always seen eye to eye with Frank Bradley but he hits the nail on the head here.
    He berates the “code of silence” surrounding the proposed TOOndah Harbour PDA and says “the costs are TOOhigh”. TOOtrue.

    • Has Council, and State Govt, ever considered that the Walker project may never go ahead?
      It may get approvals but that doesn’t mean that Walker HAS to go ahead. What if circumstances change?
      “If Adani gets environmental approvals and a licence to mine, the value of its asset will have soared whether or not it actually mines. It could even onsell the asset without mining.” (economics editor of The Age)
      Could that apply here?
      Already surrounding development applications are factoring in the PDA.
      Perhaps just as well tourists can jump on the boat at the Howard Smith Re-develop ment on Brisbane River…it’s already under way.

Comments are closed.