Sue Brooks' Blog

sue January 6th, 2010

Prepared by FCRC CEO Andrew Brien in response to media enquiries and posted here with his permission… I hope this helps in understanding the processes that Council needs to undertake now that we are one region in relation to aviation. At no time do I expect Council to make decisions which do not involve community input so please feel free to voice your thoughts.

Future of Fraser Coast Airports

 It appears that there is a lot of misinformation in relation to the current situation regarding Fraser Coast airports. Much of this is brought about by people speculating on the work that is currently being undertaken by the Council. The purpose of this letter is to outline the work that is currently underway and is already publicly available information.

 The Fraser Coast Regional Council is currently undertaking a “best value” land use assessment of the two airports currently owned and operated by the Council. Underpinning this review is the work that is being undertaken by State Government looking at the Churchill Investigation Area and the existing master plans for the Maryborough and Hervey Bay airports.

 The purpose of the study is to identify the best value land use for the existing sites based on different scenarios. Two of the scenarios being considered are:

 *Retaining either one or two of the existing airports in current locations without consideration of a new airport; and

* Retaining either one or two of the existing airports in current location and the development of a new regional airport in a new location.

 The two scenarios provide an opportunity for Council to fully consider the best way forward in relation to the ownership and management of the sites.

 The timeframes that are being considered are medium to long term, (ie 15 years or longer) however the need to have this work completed before the next stage of master planning is essential.

 There has been much speculation and discussion in relation to the airports and the approach being taken by Council. The Council is looking at the longer term issues associated with the ownership of two airports in close proximity and how the Council can maximise any return on the investment. The costs associated with the operations and maintenance of an airport are high and unless the costs of operating the airports can be recovered from airport users, there is a need to subsidise the costs through general rates.

 Budget

Maryborough airport –

• Total Revenue $25,000
• Total Expenses $133,000 (operational not including depreciation)

 Hervey Bay airport

• Total Revenue $1.48m
• Total Expenses $2.34m (including depreciation and finance costs)

 In addition the Council has allocated $1.09m in capital expenditure for both airports in 2009/10.

 Fees and charges

The Council has recently resolved to change the casual landing fees and carpark charges applicable at its airports. This shortfall in revenue for the airports will now be made up from general rates.

 Flight Training Queensland

The proposed flight training school which was being considered by the former Maryborough City Council and the now Fraser Coast Regional Council was not stopped by Council, but was stopped due to a failure to negotiate a commercial return to Council. The Council was not opposed to Flight Training School, but did not want to be tied to a long term (50 year) lease which was not going to provide an appropriate level of return to Council and the community. The decision not to proceed with the Flight Training School was made by Flight Training Australia and was based in part on not being able to meet the Council requirements. When the matter ultimately became a commercial decision the project did not stack up for Flight Training Australia.

 Leases

The decision of Council not to release more land or enter into long term leases is based on the fact that the Council has not yet made a decision on the long term future of the airports. Once the best value land use study is completed and Council has made a decision on the future of the airports then the Council can look to enter into arrangements which are consistent with the longer term plans for the sites. For example – if the decision is made to construct a new regional airport and close the existing airports, it would not be appropriate for Council to enter into longer term leases with individuals and companies on the existing sites.

 Why undertake a further study?

Prior to amalgamation each Council was responsible for its own assets and how they were managed. Following amalgamation the new Council needed to look at all the existing assets (including airports) to ensure that they were being managed appropriately and providing appropriate returns to the community. The previous studies assumed that there was only a single airport and that this should cater for all uses (ie general aviation as well as passenger services). This is clearly the case as both airports were competing for passenger services as well as trying to bring in more aviation associated industry.

 This approach is considered appropriate and is in line with best practice principles. Under or over utilisation of assets comes at a cost and there is a need to ensure that the use is appropriate and that users contribute towards the management of the asset.

 Future Development of airports

Given that no decision has been made on the future of the airports, at this stage it is unknown what purposes could be appropriate on the two sites. This will be further considered once Council has considered the best value land use report.

 Recent articles

There have been a number of articles in the Chronicle in recent weeks relating to the Fraser Coast airports. Whilst the information provided above addresses most of the issues raised there are outstanding matters to clarify which relates to Commonwealth funding and information requests regarding leases. The following extracts have been provided and whilst they do not include all of the funding received by Council in relation to airports, it does indicate where the majority of funding has been allocated and spent.

 The following are extracts from letters regarding Maryborough Airport

  (sorry images aren’t working)

 The following are extracts in relation to Hervey Bay Airport

 (sorry images aren’t working)

 In relation to specific enquiries from Mr Miller and Mr McNeil, both of these people have been provided with answers in relation to leases and future development opportunities at the airports. In a letter to Mr McNeil in November 2009 it stated:

 I refer to your recent enquiries regarding opportunities for leasing at Hervey Bay and Maryborough Airports.  I am aware from your advices that you had previously made similar enquiries with the Hervey Bay City Council in relation to Hervey Bay Airport prior to amalgamation.

 As you would appreciate, amalgamation of four individual Councils to form the Fraser Coast Regional Council has necessitated a review of Council’s strategic direction in relation to key infrastructure.  Earlier this year, Council directed that a land use study be undertaken in relation to the Hervey Bay & Maryborough Airports in order to establish the future direction of both sites.  This study is currently underway and it is anticipated that the preliminary results will be available for the consideration of Council by January 2010. 

 At this stage, approval has not been granted by Council for the release of new sites for hangar / business development and indications are that this will not occur until after the land use study has been received and a position adopted.  It is anticipated however, that a number of existing leases at Hervey Bay Airport which are due to expire will be advertised for public tender in accordance with the Local Government Act.

 As discussed during our telephone conversation, tenders are publicly advertised via print & other media and the onus rests with the tenderer to identify and act on such advertising.  As a courtesy however, I have given an undertaking to provide notification to you via email when airport tender opportunities are next released.  The specific timing of the tender process will be determined by Council’s Property Management unit.

 From the brief details you have advised in relation to your proposal to establish a flying and ground school, I believe these activities could be a valuable addition to the operations of either Airport and would welcome provision of further details following the resolution of the current land use study. 

 In relation to the resolution of the previous Council, it is reproduced below:

 from a Meeting of Council on 20^th November 2007, was moved by Cr Dautel and seconded by Cr Morris and is reproduced below:

 “1.      That in respect of the Bellman Hangar, located at Maryborough’s Airport and currently tenanted by Maryborough Aviation Services, Council resolves as follows:-

 (a)      That Council make application to the Environmental Protection Agency to remove the hangar doors, as it is considered that the cost of repairing the doors is prohibitive,

 (b)      That the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to negotiate a reasonable time frame in which the present tenant, Maryborough Aviation Services, is to vacate the building,

 (c)      That the present tenant is to continue its current month to month Lease arrangements pending finalisation of negotiations; and

 2.       That the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to seek legal advice regarding any implications resulting from the above decision.                  MOTION CARRIED 8/0”

 On Tuesday an extensive list of specific questions was sent to Council seeking responses within a couple hours and the Chronicle was advised that some research was required in order to ensure appropriate and accurate answers. Despite this the editorial and front page the following day were dedicated to the airport. In response to the specific questions that were raised by the Chronicle I have provided the responses below.

 Responses

 Q1. Did the former Maryborough City Council discuss closing Maryborough Airport?

 A. A review of the Council Minutes does not indicate that closing the Maryborough Airport was considered as an option.

 Q2. Does the council still hold documentation on this/these discussions?

 A. As indicated in response to Question 1 there does not appear to be any documents on file in relation to discussions on Council closing the airport.

 Q3. Is the council intending to close the aerodrome?

 A. Council has not yet considered the matter. The future of the Maryborough and Hervey Bay airports will be considered by Council as part of the future strategic planning for the Region. The Council has been advised of options that may be available and these include upgrading of the existing site, changes to the airport and its future uses as an airport and also possible options if it was not to remain an airport. 

 Q4. If so, or if this is a declared option, what will the land be turned over to?

 A. Possible future uses for the airport have not yet been considered. The Council has engaged specialist consultants to undertake a “best value” land use analysis of both Fraser Coast Airports. The outcomes of this study should be available for consideration by Council towards the end of January or the Ordinary Meeting in February.

 Q5. Is Maryborough Airport classed as “strategic”?

 A. There has been some discussion on the significance of the Maryborough Airport as being an airport of regional significance however this is not supported through any documented reports.

 Q6. What is the council’s legal position in alerting the federal government of any future development or alternative uses for the aerodrome?

 A. This is currently being investigated as part of the best value land use study and will form part of any decision on the future use of the airports.

 Q7. What did the council charge for landing/takeoff/parking fees for light aircraft at the aerodrome? Have those fees been waived and if so when? And when will new ones be decided or will the council permanently waive them?

 A. Council adopted its fees and charges as part of the development of the budget for 2009/10. The decision to amend the landing fees was made by Council at the Ordinary Meeting held on 16 December in accordance with the following – “for both Maryborough and Hervey Bay Airports, casual aircraft landing fees be changed from $9.50 per landing to $0.00 per landing for aircraft with MTOW up to 2,000kg”

 The Council will consider fees and charges as part of the development of the 2010/11 budget for Council. No decision has been made on permanently waiving these landing fees. In the event that the Council was to waive these fees permanently these will be a need to make up the shortfall in revenue through other sources such as general rates.

 Q8. What community-oriented/emergency services use the aerodrome for landing and takeoff and refueling?

 A. Maryborough airport is currently used by Royal Flying Doctor and Angel Flight.

 Q9. When will the land use study currently being undertaken be ready and when will the results be made public?

 A. Council will consider a report on this matter in either late January or early February this year. The Council will need to make a decision on when to release the recommendations publicly. Depending on the results of the study it may not be practical or commercially appropriate to release the findings immediately. This is a consideration that the Council will need to make after the Council has considered the report in detail.

 Q10. How much is this land use study costing the council?

 A. The land use study currently being undertaken is incorporated into the Master Planning budget for the airports. Council has allocated $60,000 for this purpose in 2009/10 with the land use component costing less than $20,000.

 Q11. How many outside consultants are/have been involved?

 A. To date the only use of external consultants for the best value land use study has been one company.

 Q12. When will the council’s “position” be adopted?

 A. Refer to response to Q4.

 Q13. Who is on the council’s executive?

 A. Refer to http://www.frasercoast.qld.gov.au/council/Executive%20Team.shtml , however to save time the current Executive of Council is Andrew Brien (Chief Executive Officer), Lisa Desmond (Director Organisational Services), David King (Director Planning Services), Wayne Sweeney (Director Engineering Services) and Peter Smith (Director Community Services).

 Q14. How many master plans/land use studies has this council and former councils been engaged in since 2005? At what cost?

 A. Both the former Maryborough and Hervey Bay City Councils prepared Master Plans for the individual airports. Currently the Council is undertaking the best value land use study which will be used to inform the future master planning for the airports. There has been work undertaken in relation to security plans, upgrades to facilities such as terminals, car parking etc. Some of this work has been doe in house and some has been external. In order to get a response today it is not possible to get accurate budget figures. Current year budget, as outlined in response to Q10 is $60,000.

 Regards

 Andrew

• Council related issues
• Comments (11)

sue January 4th, 2010

Interesting debate on another local blog re my comments that went to air re Fraser Island driving and accidents last night on Ch 9 news.

http://www.facebook.com//video/video.php?v=106646312681721#/video/video.php?v=106646312681721&ref=mf

I made mention that International visitors, who don’t have an Australian licence, should possibly undergo a driving test, education or other application process before being “let loose on Fraser Island”.  Keeping in mind that the comments that go to air on any TV news story are usually one sentence or remark taken out of a longer winded response to a question I can see why someone might take issue with what I said but racism… I don’t think so.

To explain further. Many people live on Fraser Island or own property there. Many locals or interstate visitors frequently visit the island in their own vehicles. These people should not, in my mind, be made to comply with any restrictions at all that limit their access to the island.

However almost every single business owner with interests on the island itself that I have spoken to all say the same thing to me. Backpackers cause problems. Even some business owners that profit from backpackers speak negatively about backpacker behaviour. So maybe this is ‘backpacker prejudice’? My opinion is straight forward. That visitors to Fraser Island, predominantly young International visitors, should not be given easy access to a 4wd full of luggage and passengers. How to bring about tighter restrictions to this group of travellers in order to keep them safe, is not racist is it? Yes it is generalising and for that I apologise but aren’t all our laws made in the same way? What is best for the majority of people? Not all laws suit all the people all the time to my mind.

So I apologise if people did think my comment was racist it was not intended to be and I don’t believe I am prejudiced against any group of people regardless of anything about them. I tend to make my judgements about people solely on their behaviour. I do however generalise at times and I honestly believe that young backpackers are a problem group on Fraser Island under the current regime. The challenge is how to best cater for them so that we can continue to benefit from their visitation to our lovely region and to ensure that they have a healthy and safe time while they are here. I don’t want to see backpackers restricted from visiting Fraser Island I probably want to see their visitation better managed though. I welcome any and all suggestions.

• Uncategorized
• Comments (6)

sue December 29th, 2009

Last night we travelled into town and had a wonderful dinner before queuing up, paying our money and receiving a black pair of spectacles each. Yes we decided to go and see Avatar. The movie started at 8.40pm and I was surprised to find a long line of people ready to experience a night at the movies. It is a long time since we have shared a theatre so full.

But from the moment we were asked to put on our spectacles until the credits rolled there was not a cough, a comment or a distracting noise for the entire 180 mins. This movie is a masterpiece and I highly recommend it. Without spoiling it for you the plot is not a complex one and involves a common theme revolving around a fight to preserve ‘home’. Avatar is gripping because the special effects are so special that we are literally transported to an alien world. A world so beautiful that I wish it was real! I won’t say more but I am sure you will be impressed if you go to see it. Do experience it in 3d as I can’t imagine it being as impressive in ordinary 2d.

One of my presents for Xmas was the latest Dean Koontz release called ‘Breathless’. I always enjoy the latest Koontz but this story grabbed me from the start and is one of those easily read impossible to put down stories. I enjoy authors who successfully combine science or history etc with their fiction writing and Koontz does so smoothly and quietly as the end of his story nears. Koontz actually questions Darwin’s theory of evolution in such a way that I will now have to go and do some research about earth history.

 As always a beautifully written story that left me uplifted and feeling very glad that I share this planet with gifted talented people who can both entertain me but educate me and give me cause to think!

I hope that you are enjoying the rain and that you are getting a chance to recharge those batteries. I also hope the retailers who work very hard at this time of year are doing well.

• Just musing
• Comments (0)

sue December 23rd, 2009

What a busy time of year this is. I’m still rushing to get things done but am happy to report that our shop Mind Games is trading well which is a huge relief after a very stressful year. Many retailers that we speak to have been hit hard recently so it is pleasing to hear some good news stories from our local small business owners. I trust you all trade well during the holidays and have a relaxing day off tomorrow. My daughter is visiting and helping out in our shop so that has taken the burden off me somewhat although Graham continues to work long hours.

I have decided that what I haven’t caught up with in relation to Council business by now can wait till after New Years Day. I have tried to respond to all my outstanding queries and questions so if I have missed you I do apologise and will catch up after I have a bit of a rest.

The last week of Council was a busy one with our final meeting for the year and several Christmas functions to attend. The Mayor has received the final report in relation to the reported bullying accusations and I am very pleased that this report resulted in no allegations being substantiated against any current Council employees. It is always best to take the positive view when possible and I look forward to 2010 being one of renewed confidence in our Council team and a year when we consolidate our programmes and future plans. Much public discussion will be invited as we move forward with these processes and I look forward to this stage of our evolution as a region.

So in closing I wish you all a happy, safe and healthy Christmas and new Year and trust that you enjoy the rain and sunshine as I hope we get a fair share of both over the coming weeks.

For a thoroughly beautiful online Christmas experience I highly recommend Jacquie Lawson. After sending and receiving her cards in the past I joined up as I appreciate the care and detail and lack of advertising that abounds on her site. www.jacquielawson.com

• General News
• Comments (9)

sue December 10th, 2009

I thought some further explanation in relation to the decision by Council yesterday to approve a shopping centre development in Maryborough on behalf of Micky Souvlis is needed. Micky has been waiting some time to have this development approved and he applied for the development prior to amalgamation.

The problem that Mr Souvlis faced was that he was asking for a large development that would not comply with the existing and still current Maryborough Planning Scheme. If the development did comply I would have expected that it would have been dealt with under the old Maryborough City Council and be under construction by now.

Councillors were generally keen to support an extension and rebuilding of the retail centre in that location and recently we decided to ask our staff to explore any options that would see the development go ahead and still be justifiable under the Maryborough Planning Scheme. This is because the officers had recommended to Council that the application be refused.

Yesterday Council received a report with grounds recommending approval for the development with a lengthy (but not unusual) list of attached conditions. These conditions related to such things as the total floor size of the building, bulk and scale of the building, setbacks to other boundaries, pathways and driveways conditions and car parking provisions amongst others.

I moved to support the recommendation and asked that the shopping centre trading hours be amended to facilitate late opening for appropriate retailers. Cr McNeven seconded my motion. At this point Cr Dalgleish attempted to amend the motion by asking that conditions be altered to reflect a document emailed directly to Councillors, by the developers consultant, at 5pm the evening before. To my mind the document was not relevant, did not properly list actual conditions and our staff had not even had time to read it or the suggestions to alter conditions. Cr O’Connell seconded the amendment

Much debate ensued and the Mayor decided that the proposed amendment was actually going to alter the original intent of the motion to such a degree that it made the amendment unacceptable. At this point the Mayor refused the amendment. My motion to give a permit with associated ‘reasonable and relevant’ conditions was then put and was lost.

Cr Dalgleish then proceeded to move a motion that the development be approved and listed altered conditions which include a reduced setback (to 2 metres from 5 metres) to adjoining properties, reduced car parking provision and reduced requirements in relation to other works. I believe that these altered conditions make the development so non compliant with the Maryborough Planning Scheme that I voted against the motion. I also believe there are now inconsistencies within the conditions and that another delay to Mr Souvlis is inevitable due to the ad hoc approach taken yesterday by the majority of Councillors.

I do not believe that Council should be making decisions as important as a large scale retail development ‘on the run’ and that it should be disregarding the Planning Scheme and officers considered recommendations to the extent demonstrated yesterday.

While it is very, very difficult for all Councillors to be presented with what to all intents and purposes is a ‘good quality’ development being undertaken by high qulaity developers does not negate the duty of a Councillor to apply relevant legislation correctly and appropriately. When I vote on development applications it is my most serious duty to make decisions based on how I believe the relevant Legislation (Planning Scheme etc) like it or not, is being addressed. I cannot make my decisions based on whether I ‘like or dislike’ a development.

I wish the Souvlis family every success in their venture and look forward to having input into the Fraser Coast Growth Strategy. I do believe that retail and commercial development is constrained in both cities due to current planning schemes and hope that we can alter this as we move towards a new ‘Plan’ for the entire region.

• Development issues , Uncategorized
• Comments (3)

sue December 6th, 2009

Well the water park otherwise known as Wet Side has opened. It was wonderful to watch the kids splashing around and everyone having a good time yesterday morning. Apart from the hiccup where many people turned up at 10am believing the park would be open to them at this time, the morning was very relaxing. The weather was perfect and the park looks wonderful. Now that we have it and it is open I honestly believe it will become a very busy attraction and an asset to the Hervey Bay foreshore experience. It will need some fine tuning and yes will probably cost money for ever more but so do our Libraries and Galleries and we wouldn’t be without them. So I encourage you to go for a wander and tell me what you think of our brand new asset.

Yesterday evening saw me venture to Maryborough. I called in to say hi to the environment programme volunteers at Fay Smith Wetland celebrating a year of hard work. I know it sounds repetitive but without these hard working volunteers our region would not be the attractive place that it is. Thank you to all our volunteers.

Then off to the Gatakers Artspace which was officially opened. Like the water park both these projects were Q150 funded. It too requires several finishing touches but it has turned from an ugly duckling into a modern and attractive cultural space that will add another level of sophistication and enjoyment to the cultural health of our region.

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

So to this week at Council. Quite a large agenda with a few developments to be considered. The Micky Souvlis shopping centre in Maryborough is to be considered as is another 8 storey development for 23 Main St , Hervey Bay. There is a request to negotiate the decision for the Centro redevelopment with Council needing to consider allowing the major DDS (K Mart) to open in Nov 2010 instead of the following year among other things. I won’t be voting on this item due to the fact that Graham and I own a business in Centro.

There is a report on the Della Vista Lakes development in Maryborough and Policy items to be considered including Heritage Register and Brolga to Bridge both in Maryborough. We have a report in relation to tree clearing on airport land and other items also. All in all a busy week.

If you are interested in reading the reports and Council officer recommendations please try out the Council web site as the reports should be accessible later today.

waterpark

• Council related issues , Water Park
• Comments (3)

sue December 2nd, 2009

Or should I say who is right and who is wrong? It is a difficult job being a politician. There I have said it… I detest using the word ‘politician’ to describe myself as the word brings up such negative connotations but in reality all elected members are politicians.

When we ’sign on’ or swear to abide by the rules as per the Local Government Act we all make a public declaration to, and I quote, ” faithfully and impartially fulfil the duties of the office…’ we do this under the regulations of the Local Government Act. We also swear to abide by the rules of conduct for Councillors.

I take this declaration very seriously and endeavour to do my very best to abide by it. I believe I honestly work to deliver a representative view whenever I am called upon to make decisions on behalf of you, the residents and voters of this community within Council.

What is very difficult however is translating that effort or the results of ones efforts to the public realm. Just by using this web site I am criticised by some people for speaking publicly. If I am photographed and/or interviewed too often by the press or TV media I am seen by some to be a ‘media tart’. If I am never seen or heard of via the media some people think I’m doing nothing!

How then does a Councillor balance these conflicting messages. Personally I keep reminding myself that I must abide by the rules and I must always promote the decisions taken by Council even if I don’t personally agree with them. This is the basis by which I believe all Councillors should behave. While all Councillors don’t always agree on everything (and thank goodness for the differences in opinion..) once Council has made a decision by majority vote we are all bound to support that decision. I try to always do this to the best of my ability but I am also quite prepared to state when I have a personal point of view that is different from the decision of Council. I believe I have a right to have an opinion and am forever thankful that I live in a democracy that allows me to have this personal freedom to ‘have and voice an opinion’.

For example I am on the public record as not being supportive of the water park. I voted against the park being located where it is. I also recently voted against Council providing some financial assistance to the operation of the park. People can see my ‘no’ vote as it is noted in the minutes of the relevant meeting. But now that Council has made the decision (by majority vote) to support the park I will do whatever I can to see that the park is successful. It is a huge investment, an absolutely wonderful concept and I hope with every fibre of my being that it is successful and that residents and visitors alike throng to it and enjoy it.

So back to the media. I don’t try to attract media attention but I have a portfolio that involves many issues that are good media fodder. Dead fish, foreshore debates, recycling and sustainability issues, trees or no trees, Traveston Dam etc, etc are all issues that are directly related to my portfolio responsibilities. I’m also appreciative that our Mayor has always supported portfolio Councillors speaking on items relating to their portfolio rather than being the sole media spokesperson himself.

When the Mayor is absent the Deputy Mayor becomes for all intents and purposes the Mayor. Decisions, signatures and media opportunities are always greater for the Mayor than for individual Councillors. The Mayor is regularly invited to events that the rest of the Councillors are not invited to. This is as it should be. In the last few weeks Cr McNeven has been in every way describable the Mayor. Yes we refer to her as our ‘Acting Mayor’ but what we mean is that she has assumed all the duties and responsibilities of the Mayor.

It is unfortunate then to find that her responsibilities and her appearance in the media have been called into question via the Chronicle speaking to another Councillor. What should remain an internal issue about roles and responsibilities has become media fodder. So I would like firstly to express my disapointment at that happening and then to say that I totally agree with the editorial written yesterday by Mr Peter Chapman. Thank you Peter for a succinct description of what should not have even been a story.

Now I am sure I will be criticised for commenting publicly about a media article but if I don’t comment I am criticised for not being communicative. I can’t win it seems.

The media have a difficult job of reporting newsworthy items of interest accurately and with very few words. Reporters and journalists have to pump out regular stories on an hourly basis. They don’t work 9-5 they work much longer hours than that. Sometimes they hit the nail on the head and get a story just right, sometimes they miss the full picture by a country mile but the vast majority of the time they represent differing points of view and teach us something we may not have known. If it was not for our media I’m not sure we would have ended up with a pleasing decision re Traveston Dam.

So the lesson here is be truthful and accurate in what you say, behave professionally, treat your colleagues with respect, apologise when you throw the inevitable dummy spit and behave like adults not children. Then again sometimes I think children often behave better than some adults…. See what I mean!

Oh well back to balancing on that tightrope, trying to be communicative without being negative, vindictive and/or misrepresenting anyone or anything…. and looking to the skies for some more rain so we don’t have more fish kills. Cheers, Sue

• Council related issues
• Comments (2)

sue November 28th, 2009

I imagine that the debate about the Hervey Bay (and beyond) foreshore will continue for eternity but at least I survived the forum on Thursday evening at USQ without too many bruises.

I don’t enjoy public speaking and was quite nervous about my presentation but I believe that the large audience appreciated the overview I gave of the current Hervey Bay Forehore Plan and the personal comments that I ended the presentation with. There were 4 other speakers besides myself being Greg McGarvie (sec. FraserCoast Sustainable Development Assoc), Brett Langabeer (USQ staff member), Kevin Smith (Manager Le Mer) and Leigh Bennett (consultant to USQ etc. and past HBCC CEO). The facilitator was Steve Dixon (real estate). I do think that all 4 other speakers were promoting a level of development or change for the foreshore/Esplanade varying from resuming caravan park land to introducing more lawn areas, providing increased views and to increased built development. I recall Steve Dixon saying to the TV news reporter that people come to live here to be by the sea and they expect to see the sea! 

Needless to say I totally disagree with this opinion.

The other presenters, in my opinion, agreed that we don’t want to chop down trees but it was hard to understand how you could achieve some of the outcomes presented without tree removal.

On Thursday morning I drove the Esplanade from The Gables to Urangan and noted the distance and the condition of the foreshore. I also measured (lineally) how much space is ‘natural’ and how much is ‘developed’. I think we have a good balance and also have room to accomodate more people into the future. We are extremely privileged that we have 12 kms of ‘urban’ foreshore.

Thursday lunch time I drove to the Seafront Oval and got out my bike for a ride along the pathway. I had never previously ever walked or ridden the entire pathway in all my 11 years here! I began at Seafront Oval and 30 minutes later arrived at Margaret St, Urangan where I turned around and headed back. What did I see?

I saw people walking, people cycling, people sitting in the shade and eating or resting or playing. I saw an elderly couple gazing out to sea. What made the scene memorable was the caring manner in which the gentleman had his arm gently around his partner holding her in a relaxed cuddle. I saw two young guys walking their small black puppy. I saw a jogger who nearly overtook me so I decided to peddle just a little faster. I saw someone windsurfing and the van pull up to await a brave skydiver. I saw two youths using metal detectors obviously hunting for treasures and a picnic table full of young men laughing and talking and ‘hanging out’ together. It made my day when they returned my wave with a call of ‘hey sexy!’ It has been too long to remember since anyone described me in that manner. I saw labourers and office workers alone or in small groups having their lunch. I saw mothers watching while their young children played. I saw people reading, doing crosswords, listening to an ipod or talking on their mobile. I saw people on the jetties using mobility scooters and people snoozing on the grass.

I also saw the beautiful blue waters of our wonderful Hervey Bay, the green leaved trees and the sun drenched clear blue sky. I saw dry brown leaves and grasses and green well watered lawns. I saw dry and dusty sand dunes waiting patiently for rain and I saw only 4 pieces of human produced litter on the entire trip. I heard birds calling, waves gently breaking and the sounds of human happiness. I certainly must take this ride more regularly and venture to other parts of the foreshore. I enjoyed every minute of my 60 minutes and I’m sure my body also benefitted from the gentle exercise.

I was amazed at the different perspective I gained of the foreshore from the seat of my bike. Nearly the entire length of that pathway were views of the water which aren’t available from the road. It reminded me that when we speak of something as important as our foreshore we have to remember to  think about it from all angles. The views we are rewarded with include views from a boat in the water, (few buildings protrude above what could be the middle of the bush) the end of our Pier, the sandy beaches where we sit, the pathways where we can walk and cycle, the Esplanade on which we drive and the buildings where we can eat, shop and sleep.

The foreshore vegetation provides shade from the sun, shelter from the wind, a home for much wildlife, and a beautiful natural setting found in very few developed urban cities. The vegetation growing alongside our beach also protects our buildings and helps prevent more serious erosion.

I moved to Hervey Bay primarily because of this beautiful foreshore. I love that the city lies alongside a peaceful calm Northerly facing Bay. I love the green trees and the relaxing drive along the Esplnade at 50km with no traffic lights to interrupt my journey. I love living so close to the foreshore that I get to walk on the beach every day. I can’t see the sea but I live close enough to hear it. The trees between our house and the water are what make living on our little patch of paradise a blessing. Where else could you live on acreage just 10 minutes from ‘town’ and walk to the beach every day if you choose to? When the Northerlies are blowing at full blast all we have here is a gentle cooling breeze.

Council is curently reviewing the actions associated with the adopted 2007 Foreshore Plan. This review has been underway since earlier this year and had been planned when the Foreshore Plan was initially adopted by the then HBCC in 2007. Council will decide which actions within the plan we have met, which ones we haven’t and whether these actions need to remain in place. I personally have asked that we also discuss what we can do in relation to improved weed management. I do expect that mulched areas will not increase and that they will be well maintained. I do expect some trees to be planted to provide shade where we have gaps and to replace trees that are removed because they are dangerous or dying from old age. Other planting should incorporate ground covers to help prevent erosion.

I will advise you via this site when that report is listed for a Council meeting. It will be either late this year or early next year. I have also asked that the plan be mounted on the Council web site. I expect that a new ‘Foreshore Plan,’ encompassing the entire Fraser Coast foreshore, will be needed once we conclude our SEMP and the Sustainable Growth 2031 – Land Use Strategy targetted for 2011.

Thank you to everyone who came along to USQ last Thursday and also to all the people who have emailed me and written to me with their thoughts about the foreshore. The overhelming majority of you seem to agree with me. We don’t want a ‘concrete coast’ and we basically want the foreshore to be maintained in a natural manner pretty much as we find it today.

We are truly belessed to have such a beautiful place to live and I hope that we can continue to care for it and appreciate it for many years after I’m long gone.  I believe that people come to live here and to visit our patch of coast because it is special, beautiful and so very, very unique.

• Council related issues
• Comments (6)

sue November 25th, 2009

Tonight I am one of the speakers appearing at an Esplanade/ Foreshore forum at USQ at 6pm. I offered to outline the current Council adopted Foreshore Plan so will be trying to cover this in the alloted 5 mins. It will be a rush and I hope my powerpoint works and looks OK!

It will be interesting to see how many people attend and what type of questions are asked. The foreshore is always a hot topic and I hope that most of you agree with my personal views that the foreshore is a jewel in our crown, we are lucky to have such abeautiful sheltered and shady foreshore and I don’t want to see it turned into a manicured, pruned and trimmed lawn.

Council and related news..

 Recently Council decided to form an Economic Development Advisory group which has been created through the Economic Development portfolio under the guidance of Cr Gerard O’Connell. We have released our financial statements and Annual Report for 08-09 and dealt with many other issues. 

 Recently in confidential, Council dealt with issues relating to the WBWC Water Park and to USQ in the creation of the Fraser Coast Centre for Economic Development and Enterprise (CEDE). Council was asked to financially contribute to these projects. I declined to support financial assistance to the water park on the grounds that I don’t believe Council should be involved in the running of the park it being a WBWC responsibility, but I did support a limited contribution to the establishment of CEDE with ongoing support being dependent on results gained after the first year of operation.

 At the last Planning and Development meeting for the year Council will decide the future of the Souvlis retail development in Maryborough. This development is proposed to be larger than the Maryborough Planning Scheme requirements at over 2000sqm so Council has to decide how best to progress this development. It is very difficult at times to make decisions that go against the adopted Planning Scheme. I personally endeavour not to support development that is in contradiction with ‘the rules’ but it is difficult when one personally doesn’t support or like the ‘rules’. I believe retail development is very much constrained in our Planning Schemes and retailers have great difficulty in arguing the ‘need’ for their developments etc. It seems to me that residential development suffers less from such constraints.

 LAND USE STRATEGY LAUNCH

Yesterday Council launched our Land Use Strategy which is now called Fraser Coast 2031 Sustainable Growth Strategy. I have eagerly awaited this as it is the beginning of the process to formulate a brand new regional Planning Scheme. I encourage everyone to take an interest and have a say in the future development of our region. Public consultation will be a very important part of this process and will be widely promoted. It should commence in late January or February 2010. Stay tuned so that you can have your say…

• Uncategorized
• Comments (1)

sue November 18th, 2009

As reported in the Courier Mail …..

FIRST-home buyers could be financially encouraged to settle outside of the booming southeast corner to help shift population growth to the regions.

Premier Anna Bligh is considering a $3000 boost to the  first-home owners’ grant for people buying property outside the southeast.

The Government believes a $10,000 grant would help encourage existing residents and those moving to Queensland to buy houses in regional areas, aiding the local economies.

The policy is the first the Government has proposed to actively discourage people away from the southeast, where population growth is putting huge strains on transport, electricity and water infrastructure.

My reaction and comment…….

This is a momentous occasion if Anna is serious and follows through to develop and implement such a policy. After living regionally most of my life I have come to realise that a city with a population of around 100,000 people is a good size. By good size I mean that a city with this many people can support a good range of employment options, high quality education, health and sporting services and facilities and excellent cultural and entertainment activity.

Cities with populations smaller than this struggle to raise revenue for infrastructure and the provision of services and are very much dependant on outside assistance to service their community needs.

With a hundred thousand people a city can become much more sustainable than a smaller city can. It can reduce the exodus of its youth to ‘the big smoke’ and still guarantee a relaxed but cosmopolitan lifestyle where traffic jams and grid lock are never seen. It can, more importantly, provide its food and water services in an economically efficient and sustainable manner.

I support the move towards decentralisation and believe that it will assist in the preservation of eco systems, rivers and other important and threatened natural habitat and the fauna that lives there.

To achieve this outcome requires careful planning and I look forward to debating these issues as the Fraser Coast Regional Council investigates our future land use planning.

• Uncategorized
• Comments (2)