PlanningAlerts

11 Comments

Create an account or sign in to have your say by adding your own comment.

1. Such a shame that RCC has allowed another ugly block of units in this area. Already there is rubbish thrown down the Esplanade bushland from the small block building adjacent, where will the wildlife have left to go?
   

2. I agree Lucy, the once beautiful rainforest like area below is being decimated by rubbish, falling trees, the council hardly ever clean up the area.

3. This building has already started!

4. I agree. It is very sad.

5. And another thing, that area is a flood risk. Massive. Look at the flood maps. 2011. Very bad. Whole area was flooded. And we are back in la Nina so it will be bad again. Once those extra 30 units are built, that is so many more people affected. Reckon they could sue the council for damag s. Very irresponsible to let those 30 units be built on a floodplain. And with GLobal warming and sea level rise. They may not be able to get insurance too because councils own flood maps show it is in the red zone. Extreme danger for storm surge. And if the drainage is compromised, which it will be because it has a cliff immediately behind it. Huge storm water run off. That is why it is a wetlands a few hundred metres on. Council have a huge compo bill ahead of them if they let this development go ahead.

6. AND another thing- SUBSIDENCE. The nature of the soil, being largely sandy and previously, mangroves, the base may not cope with the tons of concrete needed for 30 apartments spread out over only 2 blocks. A recipe for disaster especially if the cliff behind is prone to landslip. Geology report should be published.

7. And they will insist on those trees behind the site, up the hill, (one of which is the MOST magnificent gum tree), that shade the pub' s children's playground area, they will insist on tearing them all down to make it look ' nice and clean'. Nevermind the wildlife that will be displaced.

8. One other thing too. The pub. How will patrons feel being able to eyeball the residents in those units. And how would locals feel about them and their children being spied on from those units at the back. So no privacy for local patrons and their children. God forbid a pedophile bought a unit at playground level. Jeez. Frightening!!! And if the patrons wanted privacy they would have to fence and that would take away the view which is a huge draw card. And thinking about it I can see the new residents complaining about noise so the pub won't be able to play live bands. So no view and no privacy... It will change the character of Redland Bay to being just a bedroom suburb rather than a vibrant community. I think it is just the wrong fit for that land.

9. And, the man who owns the land who is developing it for units, doesn't even live in Queensland. He is over in Perth WA. So he has no interest OTHER THAN MAXIMIZING HIS PROFIT at the expense of the buyers who will incur damages, the council, rate payers and the community.

10. It would appear that Sandra Jehan's comments relate to the proposed development below the Redland Bay pub, not the Bay House development that has commenced construction at 143-149 Esplanade.

11. I think you are right Stacey. My mistake.

Have your say on this application

Your comment and details will be sent to Redland City Council. They may consider your submission when they decide whether to approve this application. Your name and comment will be posted publicly above.

Create an account or sign in to make a comment