On Wednesday morning, Redland City Council will consider downgrading koala bushland protection at 42-48 Sturgeon Street in Ormiston to facilitate development of 59 townhouses.
Other items on the Council’s meeting agenda include:
- Adoption of the Council’s first “Reconciliation Action Plan”
- Adopting an updated “Customer Contact Policy” to be renamed the “Customer Experience Policy”
- Approving a change to Council Meeting Standing Orders
- Receive an update on a class action (Raby Bay?) in closed session without media or the public present.
What about the council’s community satisfaction survey?
Nearly-two thirds of locals believe there is too much development, not enough infrastructure and the district’s rural character has been lost. This is one of the findings from a community satisfaction survey of 600 respondents, carried out for Redland City Council. Just 19 per cent of 600 people taking part in the council’s community satisfaction survey said that council was doing a good job of managing growth and development, according to information leaked to the Redland City Bulletin.
Why has the report on this survey, funded by ratepayers, not been made publicly available?
What happened at the last meeting?
At its last meeting on 17 July Council decisions minuted included:
- Approving a systematic inspection of properties to check registration of cats and dogs.
- Noting a report on activities of the Council’s Economic Development Advisory Board
- Undertaking a feasibility study into “an Olympic standard white water rafting/canoeing/kayaking facility in the Redlands”, discussed by Redlands2030 in Cleveland aquatic centre plans abandoned
Five matters were discussed in closed session. The minutes record that:
- Council decided 8/3 not to purchase land in Ormiston for conservation purposes.
- Council approved a number of actions in relation to the Barro Quarry appeal which appear to have been ineffective.
- Council will proceed to community consultation about proposed major amendments to the City Plan (adopted less than 12 months ago).
- To grant a concession to certain ratepayers and accept the transfer of unencumbered land in full payment of the rates and charges
- To note the Redland Investment Corporation’s Business Plan and Budget 2019-20 to 2020-21 and to keep these documents confidential.
Koala bushland to be site for 59 townhouses
Plans to develop 59 townhouses in Ormiston depend on Redland City Council approving a request for downgrading the protection of koala habitat from ‘Bushland Habitat’ to ‘Rehabilitation Habitat’.
The request will be considered as item 13.3 of the agenda for the Council’s general meeting on Wednesday 31 July 2019.
The officers’ recommendation is: “That Council resolves to approve the reclassification of the area on Lot 3 RP209626 and Lot 13 RP55933, identified as Medium Value Bushland Habitat to ‘Medium Value Rehabilitation Habitat’, under Schedule 11, Part 4 of the Planning Regulation 2017.”
The site at 42-48 Sturgeon Street in Ormiston changed hands in early 2019.
These properties used to be heavily vegetated but tree clearing, including work undertaken with the approval of Redland City Council in 2013 and 2016, has significantly reduced the amount of vegetation. Dozens of large koala habitat trees were lost.
In 2018 Redland City Council selected this part of Ormiston to be a koala safe neighbourhood. Initiatives undertaken by the Council to promote a koala safe neighbourhood in Ormiston included road signage encouraging drivers to be more wildlife aware.
Redlands2030 – 30 July 2019
Please note: Offensive or off-topic comments will be deleted. If offended by any published comment please email thereporter@redlands2030.net
9 Comments
More and more rates from high density housing versus wildlife preservation in the Redlands!
Which way do you think this scorched earth policy Council will go?
A no brainer!
Has the Redland City Council forgotten its 2016 – 2021 Koala Conservation Action Plan where it plans to retain a viable koala population? Allowing any koala habitat to be reduced is not the way this will happen. Surely it should realise that if you cut down koala habitat trees then the koalas will have nowhere to go and thus will become extinct in the Redlands. Why is the Council wasting ratepayer’s money on developing Plans when it is not prepared to follow them? Why waste money on strategies and research unless the Council is really concerned about keeping koalas? A moratorium on cutting down ANY koala habitat is surely the first step in any serious approach to the issue.
In 2018 an advert that was placed in the Redland City Bulletin by Redland City Council. It compares koalas to tradies and says that both have that rugged unshaven look and children are fascinated by both of them. The advert concludes with “Let’s care for koalas – You know it’s right.” In order to survive we all need food and we all need a safe place in which to live. That includes koalas yet the people who are using rate payer money to pay for these 1/2 page adverts are the same people that are allowing koala habitat to be cleared at an alarming rate. And they want us to vote for them again next year.
It’s hugely disappointing to see that comments such as that from Dr Tafe feel it necessary to say “I’m not a leftie or a greenie but…”
Dr Tafe, hurray for taking th3 stand you have! But surely action to conserve habitat, protect animals, reduce pollution, and on and on, were and are initiatives by people who might be described as lefties or greenies. I’m very proud not to be a rightie!
But it does demonstrate the powerful effect of theconstant distortions and untruths from “conservatives”. (Have you ever thought about how ironic that label is?)
I have to agree with Iain below when he says that putting up warning signs about koalas is just a slap in the face to anyone who gives a dam about conservation in the community. I am not a lefty or a tree hugger but I am a retired biologist who is aware of the plight of our wildlife in the Redlands and the continuing disregard for our natural environment by both Redland City Council (RCC) and State Government. RCC has the audacity to advertise “plant a tree day” in its magazine at the same time it is allowing developers to clear large sections of mature eucalypt forest. Even the area down behind Toondah is known to be home to 18 koalas but both RCC and state government support its destruction so that a wealthy developer can construct thousands of units over protected wetland. Shame on both RCC and state government for disregarding your voting constituents and the sustainable development of the Redlands. Well may you come up with a catch phrase “Redlands Coast – Naturally Wonderful” but try doing what you have been elected to do.
Putting up Koala warning signs is really just a slap in the face to anyone who gives a dam about conservation in the community. What’s the point of putting up signs to save Koalas when all their habitat is being cut down to make way for more rate paying revenue. “Where cutting down all the trees but it’s up to the public to look out for koalas,”(Redland shire/city/coast/corporately driven corrupt council.) Save the money from signs to fund Andrew Laming’s next council sponsored trip to China.
Endless growth and development on a finite planet… will be the ultimate downfall of man.
How typical of this “open for business – get rid of green tape”, prodevelopment Council! Allow high value Koala habitat to be degraded over the years, significant koala trees to be felled and then ” debate” whether to permit further destruction to aid development of more townhouses.. How on earth does this accord with Council last year, declaring this area to be a ” KOALA SAFE NEIGHBOURHOOD and erecting wildlife signs? NO TREES MEAN NO KOALAS!!!!!Road signs and pointless declarations mean nothing to a koala, displaced and starving, because its habitat has been destroyed. Thank God there’s an election due next year, when the vast mass of discontented, angry voters can vote for a responsible, balanced Council, not one solely dedicated to the the further enrichment of developers.
What more can be said? We all know that the true cause of the koalas’ decline in recent years is loss of habitat. Every additional tree we lose is another nail in the koala coffin. And yet one of the real strategic assets of the Redlands are being driven tree by tree into extinction.
And don’t say I’m a greenie or tree-hugger – but I do care about the ambience and long-term economic well-being of the Redlands. Erecting a few units will keep a few tradesmen in work for a little bit longer, and keep the odd developer off Newstart, but it will contribute to the systematic destruction of the faunal habitat that is a part of the Redlands’ attraction.
And don’t mention the word balance in this context – the balance point was arrived at and passed a long time ago, yet those with a vested interest in paving and roofing every available square metre
of the City continue to shift the balance point in favour of themselves.
Where now is the vision for this city? On the track record, one would think we were measuring success by the number or percentage of infill developments, and the latest and greatest waterfront developments.
I see little evidence of sombre, well-considered decisions made on behalf of a maturing City according to a broad, strategic view that has the blessing of its residents. What I observe is a series of ad hoc, on-the-fly decisions where vested interests of one type or another provide the navigation.
Had the fathers of those beautiful European cities Paris and London, to name just 2, adopted the approach that I perceive here, there would be little to attract tourists to them today, with the obvious economic consequences.
But perhaps I’m wrong! Perhaps at tomorrow’s meeting, there will be a strong body of councillors and officers who recognise the folly of short-term thinking, and who adopt the mantra of “not one more tree” in making decisions for the City.
I’d like to think we planned strategically like, for instance, Singapore which has a long-term strategy to cover as much of the island as possible with trees. This especially applies to the many pedestrian areas, because the government of Singapore recognises the benefit to the health of their citizens in the face of global warming, and the risk to Singaporeans of sun exposure, and consequential financial risk to the health system.
So here, in the meantime, can we please think a bit wider and deeper. Development and trees do not have to be mutually exclusive. Perhaps it’s time some of our larger developers put back a bit into the Redlands by way of lateral thinking and probably a slightly reduced yield.
“Not one more tree!”