Future Coast growth will be green and clean

12:00a.m. 22nd July 2008

Future growth on the Sunshine Coast will be clean and green, and only occur where the infrastructure to support it is already in place.

That is the broad policy position of the regional council expressed in its Growth Management Position Paper that will be handed to the state government by the end of the month for consideration in its SEQ Regional Plan review.

The document, produced after a strategic review of local growth management strategies previously developed by the old shire councils, aims to deliver on the regional councillors’ shared vision to make the Sunshine Coast an Australian model for sustainable communities.

It ensures future planning gives consideration to the impacts of peak oil, climate change, emissions trading and water and food security.

The position paper rules out, primarily because of flooding concerns, further consideration of the 367 hectare Bridges industrial estate investigation site, as well as a number of areas previously identified for urban growth by the old Maroochy Council.

Also considered inappropriate is development of flooding constrained land between the Sunshine Motorway and Twin Waters, at Bli Bli, Forest Glen to the east and west of the Bruce Highway and at Sippy Creek.

Land at Beerwah previously designated regional landscape and rural production would be considered as a future investigation area for urban purposes.

Greenfield developments like those the state government has decreed be development ready within 12 months would need public transport to be in place.

The configuration of new estates would also need to allow for best practice housing orientation.

The document will send the message to the state government that the Sunshine Coast is not anti-growth but will not tolerate growth unsupported by infrastructure or that negatively impacts on the environment.

The document will be considered by the state government as part of its SEQ Regional Plan review and would be made available for comment and submissions as part of that process.

The council voted yesterday to make it available for community consideration.

Recent Comments

Add a comment

Posted by Celtic from Caloundra/Kings Beach

on 22 July, 2008 at 9:51 a.m. ( Suggest removal )

I like the sound of strategic review of local growth management strategies... I can't understand how you can talk about growth strategies, when you can't figure out how to handle something as simple a graffiti!!!!, lets see if you can figure that out, before you try to tell me you are considering a growth strategy!!!!

Posted by STOPP from Cooroy

on 22 July, 2008 at 11:40 a.m. ( Suggest removal )

It is a great start and laying down a marker about Bridges is well over due - appropriate development with appropriate infrastructure is what this is all about.

Large scale step based infrastructure like powerlines, dams should only be built as a last resort after efficiency measures and lower impact, more localised solutions have been implemented. State government spends billions of dollars each year on large scale infrastructure without understanding whether this is the cheapest option as they don't do the work to find out!

Well done Mayor Abbot and councilors for standing up in round one of the battle for Queensland.

Posted by LJ_Turner from Marcoola

on 22 July, 2008 at 12:37 p.m. ( Suggest removal )

I like the idea that the information will be publicly available.

I object that the assumption is that the information is restricted and we, the rate paying public, must be given permission by the rate paying elected officials to get access to the information.

As a ratepayer, I paid for it.

Here is the challenge for you Bob, reverse the standing orders so that all information presented to Council meetings is publicly available online via the website within 24 hours, unless otherwise voted upon.

How's that for open and honest 'governance'!!!

Are you up for it Bob?

Viva la Revolution

Posted by Eugene from Doonan

on 22 July, 2008 at 1:26 p.m. ( Suggest removal )

Yeah sure Laurie .... and Anna Bligh will refrain from tabling hot docs in cabinet as well.

Then unicorn riding tooth faeries will deliver everyone a hard written copy under their pillow at night.

But it's a great start nonetheless.

Maybe there will be some serious leadership after all. But it's the underlying strategy and tactics that I'm interested in seeing unfold.

Posted by billm from Buderim

on 23 July, 2008 at 7:16 p.m. ( Suggest removal )

The council's Growth Management Position Paper ignores the housing affordability crisis on the coast and is mainly focused on protecting the interests of existing home owners. Blanket statements like "considered inappropriate is development of flooding constrained land between the Sunshine Motorway and Twin Waters " will only restrict supply further and drive up house prices.

Developers do have the necessary skills to develop this land without exhabitating the flooding problem, eg. the existing Twin Waters development, but these options are being ignored by the council for political reasons.

This area has all the necessary infrastructure the council wants with the exception of the rail line which the state government plans to construct once there is sufficient demand. This demand will only be generated through further developments in this area which will generate enough demand to justify the extension of the rail line to Maroochydore.

Posted by savetherange from Mapleton

on 24 July, 2008 at 11:46 p.m. ( Suggest removal )

Do you own some land over that way billm?

Posted by bcatling from tanawha

on 23 August, 2008 at 12:33 p.m. ( Suggest removal )

The SCRC growth management position paper identifies rural production land at Beerwah for future industrial after ruling out land at sippy ck for industrial. On the Caplan report which classes agricultural land due to soil types and other constraints, Sippy ck is 5-6 0n this scale with 1 being prime land and 7 vertical cliff face. What is the class for Beerwah? Should it be between 1 and 4 i would suggest that it would be extremely unwise to pursue the Beerwah option.
Come on SCRC, you know the flooding at Sippy ck west did not exist before the upgrade to the
Bruce Highway 21 years ago.Its fixable -DO IT!!

Have your say

We welcome comments on our stories and blogs - after all it's your site. Please note comments should be on-topic and not abusive. Comments are checked before publication.

Not Registered? Quick registration and comment.