Residents write about Toondah Harbour

This selection of letters from residents shows that Toondah Harbour remains a subject of great concern to the community.

Letters to Redlands2030, from concerned citizens, are always welcome. If you have something to say to the community email your letter to theeditor@redlands2030.net

Toondah – what else?

Given the recent announcement by the UN, isn’t it time the Mayor, Redlands Council the Premier, her government, and whoever the Prime minister is and their government, stand up and be counted, denounce the proposed acts of vandalism at Toondah Harbour, known as the Walker project and immediately withdraw all support from this outrageous threat to  the marine, avian and mammalian wildlife who were here long before us but who are unlikely to be here after us.

John Knights
Redland City

Toondah project needs cost-benefit analysis

I was very excited to read QYAC CEO Cameron Costello’s explanation of  the formal position the  Quandamooka Yoolooburrabee people took on the Toondah Harbour development. I was not aware of it before this. It helped me in coming to terms with my own position on Toondah: a large highly impactful potentially beneficial development that will bring many economic and social benefits and seemingly many environmental harms.

Toondah is one of hundreds of large developments in mining, public transport in cities, connecting roads in regional cities, tourist developments, and infrastructure in ports and airports needed in Australia as we grow. Especially in Queensland because we are a huge decentralised State. Ports and airports are especially expensive facilities which governments are trying to build with public private partnerships when they can. Especially in Queensland because the government has promised (mistakenly in my view) to not sell existing public assets to private companies for fear of price hikes. This means the government doesn’t have the cash to build new public infrastructure such as the upgrading of our Cleveland ferry terminal, the lifeblood of our tourist industry and our only connection to the islands which comprise a vital part of Redlands.  

Upgrading our port is urgent and is identity-maintaining for us. The government’s not able to do it for twenty or more years I  reckon because it’s not identity-making for them, it’s low priority.

I was in Federal and Local Governments for thirty years. I have studied government at Harvard. I am used to doing cost-benefit analyses of public policies and proposals. Toondah needs a rigorous analysis of its benefits as well as its disbenefits, or as rigorous as we can make it. I haven’t seen that happening here.

Yes the environmental impacts are being addressed (and I am happy to leave that to the experts) but there has been woefully little assessment of the economic benefits and social benefits Toondah Harbour’s rebuilding would create.  

And now now we are reminded that of course another set of benefits must be assessed: that of the Native Title owners of the lands we’re discussing at Toondah shores. The rights and interests of the Quandamooka People are vital even above ours who have arrived only recently and have pushed them back and decided recently that their economic future in sand mining is over. 

We have been conducting a vigorous and sometimes vicious campaign on Toondah without them for five years now and there’s a lot of catch-up to be done. I would like to see us help Cameron Costello develop his people’s requests to be involved and to benefit in ways they choose from this Toondah project:

• QYAC has consistently supported an upgrade of Toondah Harbour but only if this brings about economic development opportunities for the Quandamooka People.
• The Quandamooka People as Traditional Owners for the area on which the PDA is proposed should be appropriately consulted on the development.
• QYAC was not consulted by either the Redland City Council or the State Government prior to the Toondah Harbour Priority Development Area being declared in 2013.

This is a deal maker or breaker for me. And I hope it is for Redlands2030 too. Can we start a conversation on this please?By the way I think the rest of your last newsletter was great too, especially the advisings on candidates for the election. Not a bad effort by a bunch of volunteers. You certainly have sustained a credible quality of comment and investigation.

Zrinka Johnston  
Cleveland 

Walker’s Toondah Harbour consultation

We went to Walker’s Pop-up in Cleveland at 3.40 pm and were able to get in about 3:50pm and meet personally with the young folk there at the CWA hall. I asked the young man to write down my points of comment. He had obviously been with Walker a while as he knew about the Tasmanian development that the people rejected. We spoke for about 20 minutes.

We then made the following comments to him:

• They should begin again and set the development over land, perhaps the top of Mt Cotton where they could see the water in the distance. (He commented that koalas are all over Mt Cotton and would prevent this. I commented that koalas like to live near the waterways, not inland.)
• The amount of dredging would be terribly harmful to the whole bay and an ongoing cost to the ratepayers of Redlands.
• The Ramsar coast should be respected. I asked him why they want to build over water and he had no answer.

I reminded him that the Chinese are no longer allowed to get their money out of China as easily as previously, leading to many empty high rise units already unoccupied.

He said the whole development would be spread over 20 years so the work there would be less harsh on those in the area. I don’t believe this to be the case. 

I believe the draft plan they handed out did not show a ground view as it would appear to us.

They are trying to explain the dredging will not harm the creatures in the Bay with new dredging equipment. However, the disturbance to the mud etc will be catastrophic to the Bay as we have been advised by scientists.

A friend told me that she was at the consultation at 5:00 pm and of the approx 50 there, a vote showed 49 were against the development.  I wish the secrecy could be removed from the project so that the local papers etc could help Redlanders realise the enormity of the project and the likely cost to locals in disruption of their living area for many years.

PC
Ormiston

Cleveland Parking

Of late there have been a sequence of announcements by RIC that it has sold or lease car parks in the Cleveland CBD. It is puzzling to me that the CBD parking is not more highly prized, especially as retail businesses seem under stress and in need of a boost.

In the November 2018 Division 2 newsletter it was said that a Cleveland Centre Traffic and Transport Strategy to be available for comment early this year. Wouldn’t it have been a good idea to make sure recent sales of car parking areas aligned with this Strategy?

Then, even more recently, we have seen “parkletts” pop-up in Middle Stree and Bloomfield Street. While a novel idea, and they might prove popular, these ideas eat up even more parking!

I only have one question, is there a big picture of the future parking in Cleveland?

NM
Cleveland

Redlands2030 – 8 May 2019