The meeting will be at Redland City Council’s offices in Bloomfield Street, Cleveland
Coochiemudlo beach erosion, conservation land in Ormiston and protection of environmental corridors are among items to be discussed at Redland City Council’s second general meeting of 2021.
Councillors will also discuss two closed session items and a budget review showing an 11.6 million increase in operating surplus since the original budget was adopted in June 2020.
Conservation land in Ormiston
Cr Wendy Boglary has proposed a notice of motion which proposes that the Council resolves that a confidential report be tabled at a future General Meeting of Council, investigating the purchase of land at Ormiston.
Budget review shows $39 million surplus
The Council’s Annual Budget Review (Item 13.2) shows that for the current year an operating surplus of $39.2 million is expected.
This is an increase of $11.6 million compared with the budget originally adopted in June 2020 which projected an operating surplus of $27.6 million.
The officers’ report for this item says: “Of note, the Redland Investment Corporation (RIC), a wholly owned subsidiary of Redland City Council (RCC) has not been consolidated into the attached documents as it has been determined the RIC group will follow a separate budget development and review process”.
Environmental corridor protection
The officers’ report for item 14.4 has been posted separately on the Council’s website due to late completion.
This report is a status update on the review of options to provide an enhanced level of statutory land use planning protection to core habitat and wildlife corridors in the Urban Footprint.
The report says that “Officers have considered options available to provide an enhanced level of statutory land use planning protection to environmental corridors within the Urban Footprint” and they will consult about these options with elected councillors by the end of this month.
The proposal to do this work was discussed on 4 November 2020. The original proposal was for officers to investigate environmental corridor protection on all land in Redlands but in a 7/4 vote councillors decided to limit work to just land in the urban footprint.
Crs Karen Williams, Peter Mitchell, Paul Gollè, Mark Edwards, Julie Talty, Rowanne McKenzie and Tracey Huges voted FOR the motion.
Crs Wendy Boglary, Lance Hewlett, Adelia Berridge and Paul Bishop voted AGAINST the motion
The discussion which resulted in this vote can be viewed on the 4 November 2020 meeting video recording commencing at 45:32 minutes.
Coochiemudlo shoreline erosion plan
A proposed Shoreline Erosion Management Plan (SEMP) for Coochiemudlo will be discussed at Redland City Council’s next meeting on Wednesday 13 February.
The officers’ report says that beach erosion on Coochiemudlo is “principally linked to storm events” and that the beaches will be restored by natural processes but “this can take a long period of time”.
The officers’ report goes on to say:
“Coastal erosion on Coochiemudlo Island poses little risk to private land or public infrastructure. However the visual amenity, community access of the sandy beach and risk to foreshore vegetation in the coastal reserve causes significant concern among members of the community.”
Detailed recommendations for dealing with shoreline erosion are estimated to cost nearly $800,000 over a five year period.
This includes an estimated requirement to spend $350,000 on beach nourishment every five years in response to major storm events.
The officers’ report does not specifically deal with rising sea levels but this factor is mentioned in the detailed report by consultants BMT.
Interestingly, BMT notes in its detailed report that “No works should be undertaken that will cause reclamation” and:
“The values of Ramsar wetlands, including those of the Melaleuca Wetlands Reserve, should be preserved from impacts associated with anthropogenic [human] activities”.
These wise perspectives are totally inconsistent with plans for dredging and reclamation in Ramsar wetlands next to Toondah Harbour.
Confidential items
Two confidential items are listed on the agenda:
19.1 Managed Print Services Delegated Authority
The agenda includes the following overview about this item:
“To seek Redland City Council (Council) resolution delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) under s.257(2)(b) of the Local Government Act 2009 to make, vary and discharge a contract for Managed Print Services with an estimated value of more than $2,500,000 (incl. GST) with the
preferred tenderer, in accordance with the agreed terms and conditions”.
19.2 Sutgold Pty Ltd v Redland City Council (Planning and Environment Court Appeal) 39/2021 and 40/2021
The agenda includes the following overview about this item:
“To provide Council with an update on the Sutgold Pty Ltd (Sutgold) v Redland City Council (Council) (Planning & Environment Court Appeals 39/2021 and 40/2021) matters, which are deemed refusal appeals. Council (the respondent) will be required to confirm its position on the development applications in the Planning & Environment Court appeal. It is referred to Council for determination.”
These appeals (also mentioned in item 14.2 of the meeting agenda) relate to Fiteni Homes’ plans to develop residential housing in Victoria Point on land at Prospect Crescent, Brendan Way and Double Jump Road.
Meeting agenda contents
Here is a link to the publicly available version of the meeting agenda, which includes officers’ reports for all items except confidential items and the officers’ report for item 14.4 which is available here.
The contents of the meeting agenda document are shown below.
Redlands2030 – 13 February 2021
Please note: Offensive or off-topic comments will be deleted. If offended by any published comment please email thereporter@redlands2030.net