Southern beachfront owners at war with council as concrete path about to be built
A NEW path overlooking the beach is at the centre of an uproar from locals who claim the Gold Coast City Council mislead them over what was planned.
Council
Don't miss out on the headlines from Council. Followed categories will be added to My News.
SOUTHERN Gold Coast beachfront owners are furious with the council after failing to get a detailed brief about a new concrete pathway about to built in front of their homes.
As planning is now being finalised for the oceanway path, beachfront property owners have asked up to 20 questions of the Mayor Tom Tate and area councillor Gail O’Neill about safety and privacy concerns.
OCEANWAY GETS TICK FROM COUNCILLORS
Residents want to know about the future of pandanus trees, whether drains will be built and the security of the boulder walls they paid for in front of their homes.
In a one-line response, Cr Tate told them: “This is now an operational matter for council and I have no further comment”.
On the technical issues, a city spokesman said: “The City is currently undertaking this project and impacted land holders are being kept informed”.
Tugun property owner Rod Harper said residents were furious because the planning was being developed in secret with works likely to start as early as July after the Commonwealth Games.
“The Mayor’s answer is a cop out. It looks to me like he didn’t even read the questions,” Mr Harper said.
“He needs to tell us why he misled us and why council broke its promises and the written contracts between them and the beachfront property owners.”
Currumbin MP Jann Stuckey said the project had started as an oceanway and residents were confused as it evolved into a 3.5m-wide sealed pathway from the Bilinga Surf Life Saving Club to Gibson Park at Tugun.
“Community consultation is paramount and it does not appear to have been undertaken in a comprehensive way. Owners should have been informed every step of the way through the process,” Ms Stuckey said.
A Gold Coast Bulletin report in April 2016 detailed how the southern oceanway was being revisited after the previous council had dumped the project.
Cr O’Neill supported the concrete path and Cr Tate, during the election a month earlier, said he would back the stand by the area representative.
But correspondence from the Mayor to a body corporate in Golden Four Drive in November 2013 reveals he had a different view.
“I’d also like to take the opportunity to reassure you that council’s recent activities in the area are not to do with the development of a pathway,” Cr Tate wrote.
“The decision of the City still stands: there are not plans for a path and I further commit to never support building of a path”.
“People purchased property in good faith and are obviously upset at the change of heart of the Mayor and council,” Ms Stuckey said.
The Currumbin MP described the current pathway as “lovely” if it was properly maintained, and shared residents’ concerns that a concrete path would create more noise with bikes and skateboards.
Cr O’Neill said she had always supported the project and her position was flagged in her promotional material during the election campaign.
She rejected suggestions that she had supported the oceanway due to political pressure from pathway advocates the Friend of Currumbin group, which asked for her “action plan” after being elected.
“Friends of Currumbin publicly supported one of the opposing candidates and several of their members certainly made it known during the campaign that they did not support me,” she said.
A Friends of Currumbin petition with almost 9000 signatures was tabled at a council meeting, a report from city infrastructure was presented with several options with a recommendation to proceed with the oceanway, Cr O’Neill said.
Asked what would happen to 80-year-old pandanus trees along the pathway, she replied: “The City is currently undertaking this project and impacted land holders will be kept informed.”
BEACHFRONT RESIDENTS ASKED MAYOR TOM TATE WHETHER HE WAS AWARE THAT:
— a council flyer in February 2018 advised residents that vegetation “relocation and removal” along the Tugun/Bilinga foreshore would start in May 2018.
— council erected fences at street boundaries in 1989 to deny public access to the road reserve to allow owners to maintain it and the new boulder wall, paid for by the owners.
— residents have not been informed about what vegetation, including 80-year-old pandanus trees, will be removed or relocated, what lighting is proposed, what drains are to be inserted and views of the ocean are going to be impeded.
— no Aboriginal Cultural Heritage study has been conducted leaving open to a legal challenge.
— about potential risks relating to the possibility of the construction of a concrete path, regarding the boulder walls.
— residents have been told by council workers that it is planned to poison a substantial number of Pandanus trees because their root systems are deeply embedded in the existing sub-surface rock wall.
BEACHFRONT RESIDENTS ASKED COUNCILLOR GAIL O’NEILL:
— Did you change your mind and support the bikeway because of political
pressure from the Friends of Currumbin, and the hope that you would garner votes by supporting it.
— Why were the major stakeholders in the project — the beachfront property
owners — not given an opportunity to be involved with the preparation of the
infrastructure report of 2016.
— Why was an outside group — Friends of Currumbin — given priority and kept informed.
$45 billion: Inside Coast’s miracle economic turnaround
The Gold Coast has Australia’s fastest-growing economy, with a new report revealing the city’s fiscal output is now worth an astonishing $45bn. FIND OUT HOW
Native title stoush: ‘Billions of dollars of projects’ in spotlight
A native title group claims Gold Coast City Council may have used the wrong entity to assess cultural heritage sites, saying it could call into question billions worth of projects. But council has hit back against the claims.