For Lease signs in the Cleveland CBD – July 2018
Cleveland CBD, already struggling with “For Lease” signs in many shop windows, is likely to be further threatened if a retail and commercial hub is established at Toondah Harbour.
Redland City Council claims it considered the impact of Toondah on the Cleveland CBD retail sector via an economic analysis.
But when Redlands2030 finally uncovered the report referenced by Council, we found it was not relevant to Walker Group’s current plans for development of 3,600 dwellings and a business centre at Toondah Harbour.
Cleveland CBD and Toondah Harbour
Cleveland CBD and the Toondah PDA
Cleveland CBD was hit hard by the Council’s decisions to allow development of large shopping centres at nearby Victoria Point. But learning from mistakes is not something that Redland City Council does well.
Likely impacts of a new retail and commercial centre at Toondah Harbour were never discussed with businesses in the Cleveland CBD and Raby Bay Harbourside when the Council carried out planning for the Toondah Harbour Priority Development Area (PDA) in 2013/14.
People owning and operating businesses in struggling business centres don’t need competition from new businesses established nearby, especially when newcomers are favoured by government and council planning decisions.
Cleveland CBD businesses were strongly opposed to the Council letting Chefs Inc operate foodstalls in the Cleveland library car park. In this case the Council’s bad planning and decision making was quickly exposed by market forces with Chefs Inc now ‘closed for winter’.
When the impact of Toondah development on existing businesses was raised by Redlands2030 a Council spokesperson reportedly said: “council had considered the impact of Toondah on the Cleveland CBD retail sector via an economic analysis”.
Probing by Redlands2030 established that the Council was referring to a report prepared by consultants NIEIR in 2014 when ‘only’ 800 to 1000 apartments were being considered for Toondah. Four years later, the Toondah PDA is now in its third iteration as a 3,600 dwelling project.
The NIEIR report didn’t address the question of the impact of the PDA on the CBD (or Raby Bay Harbourside). Its purpose was to examine “Investment in Toondah Harbour and Weinam Creek”.
Election promise by Karen Williams in 2016 – not good news for restaurants in the Cleveland CBD
The Raby Bay Harbourside restaurant precinct, which would be impacted by competition from any harbourside restaurants developed at Toondah Harbour, was not discussed by NIEIR.
Impacts on North Stradbroke Island (Minjerribah) were not discussed either. Current planning for the Island’s economic transition appears to be quite unrelated to the Council’s aspirations for a mega residential development at Toondah.
The NIEIR report is clearly not relevant to assessing impacts of Toondah on the CBD and Harbourside. So why would the Council refer to this report as justification for its claim that Toondah development won’t impact on the Cleveland CBD?
An interesting admission in the NIEIR report is that the chief advantage of the Toondah PDA is to permit multi-storey development along a coastline where such development is otherwise prohibited and in most cases is also undesirable from an environmental point of view.
Perhaps this comment is why the Council tried to keep the report ‘commercial in confidence’.
Uncovering the NIEIR report
The 2014 NIEIR Report finally uncovered by a Redlands2030 RTI request in 2018
After discussion about the impact of Toondah development on the Cleveland CBD was published in the Redland City Bulletin, Redlands2030 asked Council to explain how it had considered the impacts. Council’s written response was:
The comment referred to in the Redland City Bulletin article was a report prepared by the National Institute of Economic and Industry Research (NIEIR). I am advised that due to the commercial in confidence nature of the report, Council is unable to release the document..
Council did release an excerpt from the economic analysis … regarding direct effects on the established commercial centres close to both the Toondah Harbour and Weinam Creek Priority Development Areas.
At that time Redlands2030 posed questions about the confidential report:
Why is a confidential report, shielded from public scrutiny, used as a basis for Council’s decisions?
Isn’t it time Council made this report available to all interested parties?
Does the community (again) have to invest in “right to Information” applications?
The NIEIR report Investment in Toondah Harbour and Weinam Creek was finally obtained by Redlands2030 through lodging a Right to Information request in 2018.
This report was subsequently made available publicly by the Council on its website.
The Council’s website states incorrectly and deceptively that the NIEIR report and various other reports were “available for perusal at community consultation forums”.
In fact the other reports were made publicly available only after the PDA public consultation process had finished, and only after a Right to Information request had been lodged.
Claiming that information is ‘commercial in confidence’ seems to be Redland City Council’s default response to community requests for information.
This bad behaviour is inconsistent with Right to Information laws which say public sector agencies (includes local councils) must give you the information you ask for unless there is a good reason not to.
What next?
The Council should assess the public benefit of Walker Group’s latest proposal including impacts of the proposed Toondah business centre (as it is now described by Walker Group) on the Cleveland CBD and Raby Bay Harbourside, and make this assessment available for public scrutiny.
Redlands2030 – 19 July 2018
Please note: Offensive or off-topic comments will be deleted. If offended by any published comment please email thereporter@redlands2030.net
5 Comments
I have to agree with Toni, who questions the integrity of Redland City Council to allow a large retirement village to be built smack bang in the middle of the Cleveland CBD in Doig Street. I question if there is an ulterior motive for giving the developer the green light to place a retirement village in such a location. We are fast running out of car parking space so it is natural to assume that whoever is building in this prime location will include parking levels and then charge residents to park in what has been free parking up to date. This is not good for Cleveland businesses, which are already struggling to survive, judging by the number of empty shop frontages.
just exactly why does the current council want to turn Cleveland into the next Cronulla so badly?? their locations are exactly the same, with rail, ferry services, and of course massive high rise units that create shadows, interupt wind patterns, plantlife, trees and green space disappear for lack of light, power consumption goes through the roof to light up these concrete canyons, parking disappears, crime of course will increase, our policing is totally inadeqate to handle this future look, traffic noise in even the quitest streets will be non stop, and then of course the night clubs start up, huge amounts of litter in the streets, if anyone thinks for a moment that given the go ahead, all those units will be occupied by nice families, who dress well and casually walk the streets spending their cash at trendy restaurants, you had better think again… a vast amount of these units will be sold to investors who have no interest in our area, simply using these units to dodge tax and be used as havens for crime. its going to take 10 years to completly destroy our environment and thats what the mayor and her buddies want…
The following letter was sent this week to Federal Environment Minister re Redland City Council.
Federal Environment Minister
Josh Frydenberg
Dear Environment Minister,
This letter was sent to all councillors at Redland City Council earlier this week and since then a number of concerned citizens have expressed support because they are also very unhappy with the Council, especially for supporting a commercial proposal by Walker Corporation for 3,600 units over wetland in Ramsar Protected shorebird site. There is a convention applying to this area and disturbance of the Ramsar Wetland is prohibited unless it is in the national interest. The residents are asking how a commercial development over the inshore area could possibly be in the national interest.
Good morning Councillors of Redland City Council,
During this last week you’re probably aware that the whole Ipswich Council was dismissed and you may very well ask why? After all some councillors were out for themselves but others were trying to represent the people of Ipswich. However elected officials need to be vigilant because the practices they walk by are the standards they accept.
Those that were trying to do the right thing by the people of Ipswich were being swamped by those that were representing vested interests and the residents of Ipswich had had enough.
They all share responsiblity for what happened.
I fear the same is happening in the Redlands and this is not the first time that Redland Council has been hoodwinked by certain developers. Way back in 1971-72 the multi-million dollar development company called Alfred Grant Estate hoodwinked Redland Council into letting it sell land on the Moreton Bay Islands that was underwater at high tide. Redland Council became a laughing stock all over Australia and Alfred Grant Estate went from a rich to a bankrupt company in the space of five years.
Then around 1990 Redland Council was hoodwinked by another developer hoping to make a killing by selling reclaimed land in Moreton Bay. They were so intent on their “get rich quick scheme” that they failed to shore up the blocks on the edges of the newly created canal estate. The owners and the Council have been paying for that mistake ever since. Huge amounts of money have been spent and are still being spent, shoring up the blocks to prevent them from slipping back into the water. I know two families personally that have spent many thousand on shoreline repairs and one of them has totally given up on refilling their swimming pool because it continually cracks.
Around 2010 Redland Council, now known as Redland City Council, was hoodwinked again, this time by the multi-million dollar developer called Walker Corporations Group. All negotiations were surrounded in secrecy from the outset so even many councillors were not sure of the extent of the Walker Proposal. Now they realise this was a commercial development posing as a ferry terminal upgrade yet we still have some rather naïve councillors saying this environmentally destructive proposal means jobs, jobs, jobs and the sooner the better. That statement by one of the councillors at a General Meeting is on the record. Yet another councillor at the same meeting admitted that bowing to the wishes of this developer was a mistake but “we” cannot back track on it now because that could involve legal repercussions. Yet another councillor exclaimed that the details of the dealings with Walker Corporation had to be kept secret because it was “commercial in confidence.”
Give us a break. Just how gullible do you think the residents are on issues which affect the future of their Bayside City?
Individually many of you are very good people but as a collective unit you are failing the residents of the Redlands. It is not just those residents who are concerned about the loss of mature habitat and wildlife. Many business owners are having great difficulty under this Redland Council and you only need to survey the empty shop fronts in Cleveland, Ross Court and Victoria Point to see the problem. Even real estate agents are complaining that with all these new units and small lot housing they are having problems selling established homes. The tourism sector has lost many business operators and I had to move my own business out of the tourism sector and into the education sector in order to stay viable. Yet we continually hear various councillors talking about “jobs” and “tourism.” Perhaps they are referring to rich overseas investors rather than Australians trying to make a living through business.
It appears we simply cannot trust Redland City Council to listen and act on behalf of the residents, who pay your salaries, so please give me one good reason why you shouldn’t all be sacked.
Regards,
Dennis
(Dr Dennis Tafe)
(Australia Marine Biologist)
For the life of me, I cannot understand how Redland City Council has not been included in the CCC investigations into local councils! Its secretive, behind-closed-door decision making can only be viewed as ‘fishy’ and its continual reference to ‘commercial in confidence’ is nothing but a ‘crock’.
The sooner Redlands voters wake up, the better for us all.
The conduct of Council continues to be shameful.
I note that Council Development Company has flogged off that large parcel of land in Doig Street for a high rise retirement village. The land is now used for public and council staff parking. Firstly reducing this parking plus the sale of car parking in Wynyard Street and Woolworths car park to Stockland will not assist the business in Cleveland . It would have been a smart move for Council before flogging off Doig Street property to investigate how large retirement villages in a CBD benefit local restaurants, clothes, jewellers, coffee shops and other retail outlets. The simple answer is No benefit which will add to the demise of Cleveland adding to that significant reduction in car parking.
We don’t get to find out for 12 months what the financial benefit to council will be if any.