Weinam Creek car park plan opposed by locals

Plans for a large car park on low-lying land next to Weinam Creek are opposed by local residents who have drafted a template submission to the State Government entity which approves development applications in this Priority Development Area.

Long term local residents, living near the southern bank of Weinam Creek, are distressed at what they consider to be an attack on their neighbourhood and their way of life.

The Redland Investment Corporation (RIC) has plans for a mega carpark catering for 600 vehicles abutting Orchard Beach, a quiet existing residential area in Redland Bay.

Feared impacts of the development include the noise of early start-ups of vehicles, boat launches a few metres from existing homes, and of greater concern the exposure to antisocial behaviour, which is often reported to occur in big car parks.

The carpark has been a contentious issue for many months.

• 

Council’s Weinam Creek plan

Council claims in a report considered at its meeting on 23 January (Item 13.4 RESPONSE TO WEINAM CREEK PETITION DATED 28 SEPTEMBER 2018) say that it’s master plan for the area will transform the waterfront of Redland Bay, improve the usability of the transport hub, attract visitors, create jobs and drive economic development in the area.

RIC claims the Master Plan proposes:

• additional ground level and multi‐deck car park spaces over the life of project
• a reconfigured road network to ease congestion
• provision for new residential, commercial and retail spaces including cafes, restaurants and potential medical precinct
• new pedestrian walkways and cycle ways
• increased green space and open space areas
• rejuvenation of existing parks and parkland
• improved drop off and storage facilities for island residents and visitors
• a new public boat ramp and boat parking.

Weinam Creek is a heavily congested parking area with an inefficient road network and parking configuration. Valuable space is taken up adjacent to the ferry terminal by the existing boat trailer parking which also cause pedestrian and vehicle interaction issues. Passenger vehicle parking is saturated where residents are utilising private lots for overflow parking. The report acknowledges that the existing car parking areas are subject to vandalism and crime (Bolding added).

Local residents are seeking help

Redlanders across the City can have a say about this proposed development which plans to dump long term Weinam Creek car parking problems on the small Orchard Beach community south of Weinam Creek.

Social media has debated the proposed development over some months., for example a Facebook post on the Redlands2030 site. and there is a community Facebook Moores Farm Car Park Redland Bay

PDA planning lacks credibility

Decisions of RIC and the Council stem from the original Weinam Creek Priority Development Area (PDA) announced in 2013. Subsequent planning consultation processes, like those for Toondah Harbour, have been grossly inadequate.

Walker Group were selected as preferred developers of the Weinam Creek Priority Development Area (PDA). Announcements were made that their plans for Weinam Creek would soon be seen. But that never happened and finally Walker Group walked away from the PDA arrangements.

Council has since tried to save face with its own Plan B, a development imposing significant cost to ratepayers with possible offset from property development. But still there are significant non-dollar costs being imposed on local people which are being ignored by the Council, and the State Government.

Concerns about flooding and the design responses to flooding in the locality have brought forward numerous local views that official responses to flooding are inadequate.

• 

• 

• 

Submission to DEV2018/969 Reconfiguration of Lot 3-11 Moores Road Redland Bay

If you are concerned about due process and the rights of a small community, help put some weight into the deliberations soon to be undertaken in respect of this development.

To assist in the making a contribution you can copy and paste the following submission into your email, edit as required to cover your own views, and add your own name and address and make a submission.

Submissions of Objection must be submitted by the 11th February.  

Submissions need to be lodged with the Department of State Development at email:pdadevelopmentassessment@dsdmip.qld.gov.au

Draft submission

This submission is regarding DEV 2018/969 being reconfiguration of Lots 3-11 Moores Road at Redland Bay. It is an application to reconfigure a lot in the Weinam Creek PDA (ie 1 lot into 10 lots)  with associated plan of development and operational works upon land at Redland bay. Issues of concern include:

1. The PDA development scheme should be verified . The applicant relies overly on consultation undertaken in 2013 to assess public support or otherwise for development that contradicts the local planning scheme.  This consultation was undertaken in a completely different social and political setting being at the height of the electoral success of the one term LNP Government. It has since been established that the development oriented settings of that time were inconsistent with community values as the LNP lost government.   In addition the local community has grown significantly and matured since the PDA consultation and there is no evidence that community values of 2013 have been sustained to the present time.  The implication that once the PDA consultation was completed the development scheme is in some way fixed is a bloody and blunt tool.  Given the time frame and false starts variously announced in the intervening years, the community rightly expects Council and the State Government to adopt contemporary and values based planning.  The PDA development scheme should be verified as aligned with community values before development applications are processed against it. 
2. The development application was advertised from 11 January 2019 to 11 February 2019.  While legally valid, it is a social travesty and an abuse of power. The sensitive nature of the application and timeframe being a natural holiday period achieves nominal and minimal compliance rather than serious public participation.  For a council owned developer to take this approach shows a contempt for the local community. 
3. The proposed lots 1 to 9 for housing development do not meet the existing character of housing in the area. The Weinam Creek Priority Development Area Development Scheme (WCPDADS) states Page 4 Sect 3.2 Development Assessmentunder the Land Use Plan that any development must be consistent with existing and approved development in the preliminary approval area or adjoining areas.   Existing house blocks in the PDA and adjoining areas are 700m2 minimum. The Redlands Investment Corporation, owned by the Redland City Council, intends to get as much money as possible for having many blocks instead of a few at a proposed size of 400m2. This will also devalue the existing houses but more importantly damage the liveability and quality of life of existing residents. The Redland City Council have an obligation to contribute to the area and not diminish the character of the area with small housing lots.” This is the least they can do when they are proposing to build a 600 carpark bay with a Boat Ramp behind these houses.”
4. The Vision of the Land Use Plan (WCPDADS) Page 6 states that new areas of public open space enhance opportunities to enjoy the water front and Moreton Bay and support stewardship and reconciliation. The Redland City Council should be contributing to this Vision not destroying this Vision. Redland Bay is a peaceful quiet community that has long been admired by many who come to enjoy the calm coastal waters of Moreton Bay. Small Lot housing with a proposed 600 vehicle carpark on land that is on the door step of Moreton Bay should be enhanced for everyone to enjoy not for just a few who are more focused on money and parking availability for islanders.  
5. The allocation of publicly owned  foreshore land  for use as a mega carpark fails basic planning principles.  Foreshore areas in the face of the rapid population growth of the Redland Bay locality is short sighted and inconsistent with planning principles (including those of the SEQ Regional Plan).  A proper evaluation of alternative uses (notably public uses and benefits should be used to underpin the land use decision of the Redland City Council and its development arm.  In this instance Council seems to be hiding behind its development arm to avoid proper acquittal of the public interest in the decision to use much of the subject land for massive carparking.
6. Community safety and development constraintsof the Land Use Plan (WCDSPDAS) Page 11 states that ensure that people and property are safe from Hazards, Flooding etc and to avoid or mitigate adverse impacts. The Redland City Council or Redland Investment Corporation commissioned “Engeny Water Management” for part of the PDA Submission for Flood Impact Assessment and Storm Water Management Plan.  The report is unconvincing and lay people are left bemused by  statements like:  DISCLAIMER This report has been prepared on behalf of and for the exclusive use of Redland Investment Corporation and is subject to and issued in accordance with Redland Investment Corporation instruction to Engeny Water Management (Engeny).The content of this report was based on previous information and studies supplied by Redland Investment Corporation Engeny accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for it in respect of any use of or reliance upon this report by any third party. The land proposed as car park floods regularly as local residents attest and assertions about 1 in 100 years flooding are seriously questioned.
7. Street and movement networkLand Use Plan (WCDSPDAS) Page 10 Take into consideration impacts to existing networks while ensuring acceptable levels of amenity and minimising negative impacts of through traffic. Small lot housing, proposed super lot and 600 vehicle carpark on Moores Road built for local traffic only will most certainly contravene this as stated in the scheme. 
8. Ensure Carpark areas are not visually dominant and do not detract from the building relationship with the street whether at-grade or in multideck configuration. Page 10 (WCDSPDADS). There is no attempt to really explain how a 600 carpark bay and  boat ramp will be made to hide in the surrounding development.  Scenic amenity values will clearly be at risk as viewed from existing houses and existing public lands (including roads and foreshore parking areas.  The suggested acoustic fence between all residences that directly adjoin the car park has merit but the fence barrier will likely further damage the scenic values and views had from existing dwellings – and most likely be an ineffective sound barrier.

There is acceptance among local people that an equitable parking solution for islanders is long overdue, but Council and the State government should not ride roughshod over the smaller community in the interests of the bigger and more vocal islander community.  Planning outcomes should demonstrate overall community benefits and it is to that end that this submission is made.

Kind Regards,

Your name

Your address

Your Suburb

Qld 4165 (or your postcode if different)

Redlands2030 – 4 February 2019