These are my own personal views. I do not purport to speak on behalf of Council. Decisions of Council are made only by majority vote, legislative authority or under authority delegated by Council.
Development application to be considered at the SRRC Ordinary Meeting of 28 August 2024:
MCU23/180 – Development application for Material Change of Use for Function facility (wedding venue), short-term accommodation (six cabins) and Tourist park (camping grounds) at Veresdale Scrub. Another application seeking retrospective approval (forgiveness) after the fact as a result of Council’s compliance activity. This relates to Division 2 – an already constructed and operational function facility and a large 50 space carpark – all in addition to other activities not covered by this application including an existing polo field, stables, a kiosk, existing private structures within Council’s Road Reserve (unapproved) and a large existing dam (unapproved). The dam wall has been constructed within Council Road reserve, without Council’s consent or assessment. Department of Fisheries are still in discussions on if the structure could be permitted to remain in place, given the existing fish passage requirements have not been addressed. Separate Building Approval(s) is/are required for all existing and proposed building works associated with the proposed development, and including any changes in building classification. See www.alsacepolo.com.au
I find it difficult to understand the imposition of Conditions of Approval which mention the requirement to be done “prior to the commencement of use” when commencement has occurred. There needs to be a way to penalise those who don’t believe the Planning Scheme requirements apply to them; instead, lodgement of a development application equates to forgiveness of non-compliant behaviour and fails to act as a deterrent to those who are spurred on by such a lack of consequences.
Out and about: On 23 August I gave a one-hour interactive talk to Grade 9 students at San Damiano College, Yarrabilba, on the subject of the pros and cons of tourism on Tamborine Mountain, following a school excursion. What became evident was that whilst “locals” consider Tamborine Mountain to be the centre of the known universe (and rightly so!), understanding of our fairly insular world up here is not as widespread as we may think. Students were unaware of the lack of reticulated water and a sewerage system and what that can mean to both residents and businesses, the impact one million+ visitors p.a (estimates vary between 1.2m and 1,6m p.a) can have on such a small constrained land area, our inadequate infrastructure – particularly our roads, parking and public amenities – and the fact that the Mountain is at risk of being “loved to death” (as has been acknowledged by Council). Based on 1.2m visitor p.a this represents around 140 visitors per resident, a very high number indeed. Students asked excellent questions around why we don’t have a population cap, why the Mountain doesn’t have connection to town water, and why we simply don’t allow any more houses to be built. All were aware of the traffic congestion and parking issues as a result of their recent excursion. Only one student knew what rhubarb is!
ALGWA (Australian Local Government Women’s Association) annual conference and AGM 26-27 August in Brisbane. This brings Councillors from across Qld together to improve their knowledge by way of informal mentoring and keynote speaker presentations on Social Media, AI and Cybersecurity, Strategic Innovation Planning and my personal interest, Making Decisions for Right and Good Reasons (Guest speaker Ian Wright, senior partner in the Planning Government Infrastructure Environment Group at Colin Biggers & Paisley law firm).
