People of all ages and abilities
I write with concern re the above as it seems council does not. It is very apparent that no expense is spared when it comes to catering for the tourists while locals miss out. Council boasts that it provides for people of all ages and abilities. A typical example is that some months ago council said it acquired two slippery slides so that the disabled could access the beach. Where are they now? With the current heat, most of these people have to sit in a wheelchair all day while the tourists have access to pools and/or the beach.
Another big letdown for the elderly and/or disabled would be the corridor between Elizabeth St and King St Urangan. Residents were told a corridor would be built when the railway line was pulled up some 50 years ago, and so after approx 50 years, we have a corridor that even when all the lights are working (very rare) we have poor lighting, no shelter, nowhere to stop and sit for a rest, no drinking fountain, no rubbish bins and no toilet facilities.
I live in the Urangan area and have lived here for 30-plus years but talking to other people and disability organisations in Hervey Bay know this situation is rife throughout the region. This list could go on and on about the hardships faced by the elderly and/or disabled that the council is obligated to care for but instead remind the council that with the upcoming local elections that tourists do not vote but people of all ages and abilities do.
Bazza – Urangan
Should High-Rise be welcomed?
Having read Kevin Smith's letter 25/1/24, I am confused, it has little to do with the proposed towers in Torquay and more to do with our rates!
Kevin even suggests a “4.5 to 5% increase" in every budget!
Nowhere in his letter does Kevin address the impact on traffic, water, sewerage or power as a result of some 600 units on the Esplanade!
I am not opposed to development, but development should be in tune with existing facilities and culture.
Our Esplanade is already under pressure from both traffic and parking, can you envisage what it will be like should these towers go ahead?
I repeat, should this project go ahead, it will be the first of many.
The chances of me seeing Torquay in twenty years time are very restricted, but the thought of a wall of towers on the Esplanade scares me.
Think long and hard on this.
John A Neve – Torquay
So-called opportunity
Dear editor,
In last week's issue (25th January), the article stating that "Fraser Coast residents now have another opportunity to have their say on a development application for a hotel and residential apartment complex", I couldn't help but wonder why I, or anyone in this town, should take this so-called "opportunity". After all, the article stated there are 300 applications currently in the pipeline, and I would lose a bet that this Council wouldn't approve the majority of them, including this latest misfit. Let's face it: this and the past 20 years of Councils (and the editor of that publication) simply don't like Hervey Bay as it was/is. Evidence. Simple.
Nothing is ever enough for this Council. If the Council members truly liked the Bay, they would demonstrate wanting to keep the character that most of us who actually like this place-or used to continue to argue for in the majority of letters to this publication, in the petitions to the Council, and to the majority of submissions disapproving of this latest travesty. A high-rise in Hervey Bay? Why? Despite the overwhelming rejection of the reasons for building the new Council building, they approved it; most likely the same will happen with the approval of this new development. Why? Because the Council members simply don't like what Hervey Bay is.
Every new development idea is met by this Council with the lame point that each new development is going to make Hervey Bay better. Well, I would argue that none of these developments have made Hervey Bay better enough to satisfy them since they simply move on to the next application to approve.
So one MUST conclude that NOTHING will ever satisfy them BECAUSE THEY DON'T LIKE Hervey Bay and only want to make it into some idea they have that is NOT what the Bay is or has been.
Notice too, that nothing much is said about "growing" Maryborough, which they represent. That town seems to be ok since no major development seems to be projected (except for the new rail facility being built.) What does that say?
Frankly, enough is enough. If a Council Member doesn't like Hervey Bay the way it is (it will never be as it was, will it), why not move to a place that fits his/her lifestyle vision instead of ruining what we love about this place. Better yet, vote for Council Members who advocate and promise sensible growth, and NO high rises. Enough is enough!
Regards,
Lee Hochberg
Buildings
I have never read or heard discussed what all these 'hundreds' 'thousands' ? of new dwellings spread throughout the area.. well out of town, possibly even further than I have travelled.
The precious trees just disappear, even possibly old houses removed.
Please, apart from obviously people but, what people?
Who is paying for them??
Someone must know, please share, we live here too.
Nan Hermit
Are Internet Trolls holding Hervey Bay back?
My reply to the story on Feb 7th, Are Internet Trolls holding Hervey Bay back?
Surely we should not even be thinking about or listening to the nonsense that is posted on Facebook, however, it is a platform where anyone can and do voice their opinion. It isn't illegal to do so, then why would the writer of this story point the finger at older retired men being the main focus or blame?
Perhaps the underlying issue is that some and there are many who do oppose new developments.
I can understand that, just maybe take a minute or two and consider what the reasons could be for the opposition to some future plans. All future planning is suppose to have extensive community consultation but what we are seeing more and more is a very short and I believe restrictive time period for the community to be advised and then to have their reply and express their views.
It does seem to be happening often where behind the doors decisions are made and then a limp wristed attempt is made to advise the community. I may be wrong for thinking this but I'm sure it has and does happen.
I look at Facebook and see many negative and positive opinions regarding our wonderful city of Hervey Bay but to point the finger at older retired men is a hit below the belt.
Bruce Dyson - Scarness
Biased and Undemocratic view
I have just read Glen Winney’s article in “The Advertiser”, 8 February 2024, titled “Are Internet Trolls holding Hervey Bay back”.
Undoubtedly one of the most biased and undemocratic views I have come across. Obviously he takes this view, as do all developers, because of an extreme expectation that all development should be allowed to proceed regardless of the consequences.
Developers should understand that any development should be in the best interests of the ratepayers and citizens. They seem to have the mindset that they have an inalienable right to get what they want. Mr Winney does not quite say it, but the inference is there, that he considers anyone having a different view to his is a criminal and should be executed, or given some other equivalent punishment.
I am not against development, but it needs to be in a way that is in agreement with the general majority. All the rhetoric around the need to develop and grow is not necessarily based on any real need or even desire.
For the last 18 years, Hervey Bay has had an average yearly growth of 2.04%, (from 41,225 to 58,001). Over that same time the average yearly Australian population growth was an average of 1.62%, (from 20.45 million to 26.56 million). Figures taken from the 2006 and 2024 census figures respectively. So why the need to develop? We are already significantly above the Australian average in terms of growth rate.
This growth, coupled with the number of tourists, shows that people have been moving to, or visiting Hervey Bay, without the need for 21 story developments. They came because of what it is, not what it may be, sometime in the future.
The Council has a responsibility in this push for development as well. They have an overall obligation to provide what the citizens of Hervey Bay need, would like or feel comfortable with. Any development that “pushes the envelope”, deserves to be publicly debated, not just voted on by Council. This particularly applies in instances where the local development code needs to be amended, such as increasing maximum building height limits.
The supposed “consultation” process employed by Council is a misnomer, as the consultation process is invariably a “tell them what they are getting” process. The Oxford definition of
“consult”, is “the action or process of formally consulting or discussing in order to seek advice”.
Has there ever been a public survey to determine how many people moved here because of the height restriction on buildings? People who want to see a landscape filled with 21 story developments can always go elsewhere.
Mr Winney will probably consider me one of the abovementioned criminals. I would welcome any opportunity to debate the content of his tirade.
Darrel Woodhouse - Pialba
Councillors salaries
In your last edition you questioned the full time salaries paid to LG councillors and rightly so. Before the change brought in by Labor, in Queensland, LG members were paid meeting fees and various allowances which together did not amount to a full salary or anywhere near the amount paid to councillors today.
You rightly point out that the Councillors were then mainly people who were at or near retirement and who could offer their time to run a Council which they generally did very well. The Town or Shire Clerk, now CEO, was always a professional who respected the elected councillors and he and his staff worked harmoniously with the elected representatives. There was no legislation as there is now forcing the elected representatives to virtually obey the dictates of the bureaucracy and there was usually a harmonious working relationship between the Council Chairpersons and the staff that got things done without any major issues.
Frankly, I’d love to see that return as there is no way that a Councillor could possibly claim that their job is full time. As you indicated the elected representatives were more like directors of a company and acted accordingly. By changing the way in which Councillors are paid, the introduction of party politics is raising its ugly head into our Councils, the last thing we need. There should be no politics in roads, rates and rubbish. Those supporting the current position usually do so by saying that without a full salary, not everyone could offer themselves for election.
Most councils used to have their meetings after normal working hours and that allowed those elected representatives who had a full time job to participate and it also allowed the general public better access to the Council.
It will be argued that Councils had to become more professional and so full time members are a necessity. Not so, the Councils where the members are paid by meeting fee or allowance are just as well organised and often better than what we witness in Queensland.
L Powell
