Pub test failure, Council inefficiency and nature protection laws in letters

Artist’s impression of 3,600 apartments next to Toondah Harbour (not by Walker Group)

Toondah PDA failing the pub test, Redland City Council wasting money and a call for tighter laws to stop developers trashing natural areas are opinions discussed in letters to Redlands2030.

If you think something doesn’t pass the pub test, send your letter to:  theeditor@redlands2030.net

---

Toondah and the pub test

Whilst there is significant community support for upgrading the ferry terminal at Toondah Harbour, there are 85% of residents (according to surveys), and 48,000 petition signatories, opposed to the Walker Group development of the area to include a marina and 3,600 residential units.

I find it hard to envisage 3,600 units which, at (say) 6 units on each of 10 floors, would need SIXTY 10-storey towers built on wetlands/mudflats.

This is quite apart from the far more important Ramsar listing of the site, established in 1993, and based on science at the time which has since been expanded and is overwhelmingly in support of the original listing.  Preserving the site, and others like it around the world is vital for the survival of critically endangered birds and marine life.

Since the 1980’s, proposals for developing Toondah Harbour, involving Local, State, and Federal levels of government, continue to be considered, despite significant community backlash.  Seemingly goalposts have been moved and deals done with developers to circumvent established protocols, the details of which have been denied under Right to Information.

In 2014, a professional review of the Toondah Harbour PDA plan by a group of architects, engineers and planners working pro bono, found that the development scheme proposed by the Council and State Government was ill-conceived and “an unacceptable long-term risk for ratepayers” 

The Australian Institute of Architects Queensland convened a planning workshop which heavily criticised the proposed Toondah PDA plans saying: “This dreadful and grandiose PDA scheme is something of the type we would normally only expect of some lunatic despotic government in the Third World”. 

In 2018 the officers in the Department of the Environment advised the Federal Environment Minister, and Walker Group that the proposed Toondah project was likely to be declared “clearly unacceptable”. Walker Group, which has made political donations to both Labour and the LNP, responded vigorously with a range of lobbying activities and legal threats.

In response to Walker Group’s second EPBC referral there were 1,419 submissions with 1,411 opposing and eight supporting the project. 

The Ramsar Secretariat, based in Switzerland, has serious concerns regarding Australia’s commitment to Ramsar Wetlands and continues to monitor government actions.

Walker Group’s Toondah Harbour proposal fails every pub test in the book, and must be refused/cancelled, for the sake of the natural environment both here and worldwide, without which our quality of life disappears.

R.P.
Cleveland.

---

Council waste and inefficiency

For some time now I’ve watched the staff recruitment practices of our local council. 

Recently a project manager’s job (salary of between 130 and 170K was advertised through an employment agency.    This is despite Council having their own recruitment team.   

The agencies involved aren’t all headhunters, and mostly they just advertise roles and get someone via an advertisement…. possibly 99% of the time. 

These fancy agencies (I don’t think naming the agency itself helps) usually charge about 15% of total salary. So RCC is spending, upwards of $20-25k of ratepayers money on each of these employment exercises.

A SEEK job vacancy costs advertisement about $400 and combined with the Council’s in-house team can do a pretty good job and at far less cost. The current approach seems to be a real waste of money and expertise. 

Surely retired local government employees have seen or are seeing similar abuse of ratepayers’ money and can comment on my deductions!  Our Council needs to be aware that the community has the interest and capacity to call out poor practices. If we do it a few times, things might change!  

N.K.
Cleveland

Nature protection laws need strengthening

Politicians have immense power it seems, but unfortunately, it’s often misused.

The latest situation in Margaret Court, Kenmore is an example of poor design and a lesson to us all regarding the environment and planning by developers.

After years of fighting by local residents, the proposal for a set of 104 units appears to be going ahead. Until now the area has housed koalas.

The new estate called Treetops is an absurd name as to achieve this development, trees and wildlife will be yet again destroyed in pursuit of money.

The damage caused by potentially 400 extra cars on the road will be considerable. It’s ironic that our local member Julian Simmonds got into power by using the mantra that he would ‘Fix the roads” as part of his slogans for re-election, and yet this has been allowed to go ahead. Not only are the roads not fixed, but they will also be more congested and Moggil Road is already a nightmare.

We need much tighter laws to stop developers from trashing natural areas. This is not “progress” it is vandalism.

It is yet another reason which confirms my view that the Toondah Harbour development in Cleveland must not go ahead. This is 3,600 units, the damage will be massive for local residents to tolerate, let alone the destruction of wildlife.

What an appalling legacy for politicians to leave for future generations. 

J.F.
Kenmore

More Letters To Redlands2030

Redlands Attracts National Interest

Democracy, Development And Density In Letters To Redlands2030

Cleveland traffic, ‘religious instruction’ and Toondah in letters

Redlands2030 – 6 March 2022