Council meetings and a bit of a mixture
Sue Brooks September 7th, 2009
Tomorrow Council meets for the Planning and Development Committee Meeting no 8. Items to be considered include a large Granville development application which has been on the agenda now for some three times. The recommendation is to refuse this development as it is in an area not zoned for residential development. One of the constraints for future development in the Granville area is the access across the river. Another bridge will be needed to facilitate increased urban growth in that area and bridges don’t come cheaply!
In these times of increasing financial and climatic and environmental considerations I believe it is more important than ever that Council closely address the issues of where we place urban development. Maybe the threat of rising seas etc, will see development moving inland from the coastal strip towards Maryborough?
Last week Council awarded the contract to develop our Fraser Coast Land Use Strategy. This strategy will outline where we want what as we move forward as a region and will guide the development of our new Planning Scheme. Community consultation will be a very important aspect of this process and I will be urging everyone to have a say.
Also tomorrow we will consider a reconfiguration of a Lot in Howard, a retail development in Alice St, Maryborough, an addition to the community centre in Poona, some negotiated decisions in relation to the Airport Industrial Estate, Hervey Bay and to a development in Iindah Rd, Tinana and lastly an amendment to the Bay Planning Scheme to address some bureaucratic complications in relation to the Natural Areas Overlay.
Recently Councillors toured WBWC assets which included a glimpse of the Water Park. Here is a pic of the wave rider in action…
Water Park wave machine
Playful puppies
- Uncategorized
- Comments(6)
Sue,
As the Granville development is contrary to Maryborough’s zoning a rejection would seem
the correct thing to do. As to the need for a new bridge; should council agree to the
Granville development, a contribution of 50% of the new bridges cost would seem
appropriate. Without knowing if the road is council’s or the state governments?
Maybe the other 50% could be payed for by the state?
As to “land use” what input will the public have?
What is the closing date for public comment?
Sadman
Sadman are you meaning the developer or Council contribute 50% to the construction of a new bridge? Also the Land Use Strategy consultation will be a well promoted part of the process and I will personally be advising people to comment. As the process has just begun it will be some weeks or months before consultation is undertaken I imagine. Plenty of time to think about appropriate patterns of development etc. Cheers, Sue
Sue,
The developer, they are the ones who have made a new bridge necessary.
Re: Land Use Strategy, I believe public input should be upfront, council
needs to know what the public want. Only then can the consultant know
in which direction to go.
Sadman
What the public thinks and what in reality is necessary will be two completely different things.
If this study was done based on so-called public consultation we’d have the wishes of a few trying to compete with the needs of the majority.
Future urban growth in Queensland will be in our back yard. It is already begining to take shape in Tin Can Bay and Rainbow Beach and that will rapidly spread to our coastal villages including Poona, Tuan and Maroom etc.
This growth will be supported by the new coastal highway and surprise surprise.. a bridge across the Mary river! This bridge will link to the Maryborough -Hervey Bay road meaning it will be only a ‘short’ 90 minute drive from Hervey Bay to Noosa.
Scary or rather exciting? The people of this region will not know what has hit when this happens and the developers with projects in the Granville area know this is on the horizon and are trying to capitalise on the opportunity.
From here, Sue’s suggestion of development in the ‘hinterland’ which will be Maryborough and west, will further develop creating new tourist destinations and employment.
We can make the most of this new future or try to resist it and lose the advantage.
Ben,
I find it sad that you believe what the public want and reality are two different things.
I also find it sad that in your view it OK for some outside developer to tell us what
we want !!! You talk of “the wishes of a few trying to compete with the needs of the
majority”, but that is just what you are endorsing !!
If council sought input from the residents first it would give the consultants and
councillors an over view of what we (the people) want. It might also give people
the idea that some one cares about our wants and needs.
Sadman
Sadman, it is true – we can’t always have everything our way and in fact, most of the time we don’t.
Governments thrust change on us all the time. I don’t agree with this but surely its better to be proactive than reactive.
Too little too late (as many of you would have it) and we’ll be forced to accept whatever the government of the day wishes anyway.