Gardeners dirty after development receives hundreds of submissions from same IP addresses

A Brisbane City Council investigation has found that hundreds of submissions that support a controversial waterfront development in the city’s inner-south came from the same IP address – and residents who opposite it are livid.

Brisbane City Council has found hundreds of submissions in support of an inner-city waterfront development came from just four IP addresses in the final days before the submission deadline.

Growing Forward, the group behind a communal garden which neighbours the proposed Highgate Hill development, pushed for a council investigation after flagging the volume, timing and language of the submissions in support.

A review of system logs found 329 submissions of support came from four IP addresses between August 26 and September 1 with one IP address making 153 submissions.

“It could suggest that false or misleading submissions have been made,” Growing Forward member Ruby, who asked her surname be omitted, said.

But council officers found there was no basis for reasonable suspicion of any fraudulent activity, misappropriation or falsely using another person’s information.

Their findings were detailed in a letter to the gardening group Growing Forward from Acting CEO Scott Stewart who said there was no real evidence of a robotic or automated process.

“The fact that a number of submissions were made for the same IP address does not Indicate that the individuals named in those submissions did not consent to the making of the submission on their behalf and understand the purpose for which they provided their personal information,” Mr Stewart said in the letter.

An artist’s impression of how the proposed Dudley St units could look.

Ruby said Growing Forward now planned on appealing a council officer’s decision to deny access to 10 pages of information about the submissions sought through an RTI.

The group has until next Tuesday to appeal but their efforts have no impact on the assessment of the development application.

Brisbane City Council on Tuesday said the current proposed development application was still being assessed in accordance with the time frames under The State Government Planning Act.

The application outlines developers’ intentions to knock down the existing apartment complex at 5 Dudley St and replace it with a five-storey building comprising eight apartments.

They will need to carry out sewage works where the neighbouring Kurilpa Garden sits on state-owned land at 250 Boundary St.

Growing Forward created the garden at the beginning of the pandemic to manage food insecurity by providing free produce to those who needed it.

Ruby said it was devastating to learn their hard work could be ripped up.

“People spend about 25 hours a week on the garden including a big harvest once a week with the produce going to vulnerable people who don’t have access to organic food,” she said.

“It’s been confronting to see the impact that this development could have on the gardens and they way it’s been approached by the developers.”

The development consultancy could not be reached for comment on Tuesday.

The proposed Dudley St units.

A senior figure from the consultancy responded to a Growing Forward social media post in August saying works to upgrade the sewer main under the garden would take about three to four weeks.

“As I also mentioned in our meeting, not only would we fully reinstate any temporary disturbance to the garden, I would love to help with enhancing the crop production and wider community involvement if I can,” she said.

“ I could do things like putting in raised planters so that more people can help (like seniors or people with disabilities) and could help tap into advice on other things like food forests etc.

“I will also provide locally-sourced produce boxes to offset any lost production during the sewer works.”

Mr Stewart told Growing Forward the number of submissions made either in support, or objecting, to a development proposal was not determinative of the outcome of the council’s assessment.

“I also draw to your attention that there are various ‘checks and balances’ involved in the development assessment framework to ensure that developers cannot ‘game the system’ or deceive council in relation to the community's attitude in relation to a development,” he said.

Ruby said Growing Forward members would appeal if the development is approved and continue to protest if works begin on the site.