From: Chris Harth
Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2016 6:13 PM
To: TomG@msc.qld.gov.au; NipperB@msc.qld.gov.au; AlanP@msc.qld.gov.au; KevinD@msc.qld.gov.au; MaryG@msc.qld.gov.au; LenoreW@msc.qld.gov.au; AngelaT@msc.qld.gov.au
Cc: info@kurandaregion.org
Subject: Kur-world dam
Dear council representatives,
I wish to express my disappointment that no council members were willing to attend the Kuranda Region Planning Group meeting regarding the proposed Kur-world development. I understand that it is now a coordinated project but some first hand information from the council would have been useful.
For example, why was the clearing of land on these properties not stopped when it was first reported last year and why was the unauthorised construction of a sub-standard dam allowed? Also given that rates have again risen this year why has the developer not been prosecuted and fined for the illegal dam work to offset the rate increases? Why has the permit now been issued after the developer ignored the councils laws?
Are the farmers of Mareeba Shire aware that in its current form Kur-world will require a huge water allocation from Tinaroo, which, as a high-density residential area, will override their use of water for irrigation?
Has the council protested to the State government that the proposal ignores the councils current land use plan?
This project is totally unsuitable for the area proposed on an environmental, social and cultural basis. The infrastructure necessary for this project does not exist and the economic benefits promised are unsubstantiated.
As you are our community representatives I urge all councillors to rescind the permit for the dam rebuild, fine the developer and add your support to the opposition of this project.
Regards
Chris Harth
Speewah
Subject: FW: Kur-world dam
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 07:17:00 +0000
From: Peter Franks <Peter@msc.qld.gov.au>
To: Chris Harth
CC: info@kurandaregion.org, Councillors@msc.qld.gov.au
Dear Mr Harth
I am providing the following information in response to your email to Councillors last night.
With regard to the proposed Kur-World development on the “Barnwell” property, the State Government has decided that they will be handling the assessment of this and it is completely out of Councils hands. Council will, at some point, also be consulted in regard to a number of issues arising from the application and as such, is not in a position to comment on the proposal. To do so would potentially negatively affect the value of any input we may have. In addition Council and Councillors are required to be circumspect with regard to making comment about any proposal. While they may have personal view points, they are required to demonstrate that they have open minds on issues until such time as they have all the facts before them. As such, you will not see them making comment either opposing or endorsing this project itself.
As with any development proposal, there are many factors that are considered during the assessment process. These include Environmental impact, Economic impact, Social & Cultural impact, Resource & Service impact, the need requirement etc. and the State assessment process takes all of these into account. The State will also consider the Councils Planning Scheme during their assessment process.
There has been comment regarding a number of issues that have arisen from this property.
The first is in regards to clearing. Clearing is, in the main, a State Government issue and when we have reports of illegal tree clearing we report this to the State.
With regard to the issue of the construction of the dam. When Council was made aware of these unapproved works the owners were instructed to cease work and they complied. They then lodged an application to construct a dam and approval, subject to conditions, was given. The application was for a stock water supply dam and given this property is zoned rural Council had no reason to refuse it. The fact that they have lodged an application to develop the site could not be taken into account. Their application was made under the current use rights of the property and was assessed accordingly.
In regard to the issue of erosion, sediment control and runoff, Council has, and will continue to inspect and monitor the site and will issue penalties and fines as appropriate when breaches occur. As with all our dealings with developers and community members our approach, especially initially, is educational so as to ensure that they do the right thing. The issuing of penalties and fines become our approach when they fail to respond or have intentionally or blatantly disregarded what would have been seen as reasonable. As per the relevant Privacy Laws, Council does not make public details of fines and penalties issued.
While one may not personally agree with a landowners actions, this is a freehold block of land and are entitled to undertake any activities as long as the owner acts within the bounds of the law. Likewise should they breach the law they will be treated in exactly the same way as any other property owner and appropriate action will be taken.
Council is aware of the concerns that have been raised in regards to this property and the proposed development and will be monitoring developments closely.
Regards
Peter
Peter Franks
Chief Executive Officer
From: Chris Harth
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 8:56 PM
To: Peter Franks
Cc: TomG@msc.qld.gov.au; NipperB@msc.qld.gov.au; AlanP@msc.qld.gov.au; KevinD@msc.qld.gov.au; MaryG@msc.qld.gov.au; LenoreW@msc.qld.gov.au; AngelaT@msc.qld.gov.au; info@kurandaregion.org
Subject: Re: FW: Kur-world dam
Dear Mr Franks
Thank you for your prompt response to my email regarding the Barnwell property- or Kur-cow as I believe it has now been renamed.
I was concerned however when I read that ” Council will, at some point, also be consulted in regard to a number of issues arising from the application and as such, is not in a position to comment on the proposal. To do so would potentially negatively affect the value of any input we may have. In addition Council and Councillors are required to be circumspect with regard to making comment about any proposal. While they may have personal view points, they are required to demonstrate that they have open minds on issues until such time as they have all the facts before them. As such, you will not see them making comment either opposing or endorsing this project itself.”
Given that Mayor Gilmore has chosen to publicly support this project on several occasions and he has obviously ignored the requirements you stated above can we now expect a public apology from him? Will he now be censured by the other councillors?
My disappointment in them not attending the public meeting was not so they could express their “personal view points” (although they would have been welcome to do so) but more so that the Myola and wider Kuranda community who will be massively affected, could express theirs.
During the recent local elections all councillors were adamant that they would support our local communities so the reasoning quoted above seems somewhat illogical. If we are unable to determine which councillors will support us in this matter before they are consulted by the state gov. how will electors know who we should support on the council?
Regards
Chris Harth
From: Syd Walker
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016
To: Peter Franks
Cc: TomG@msc.qld.gov.au; NipperB@msc.qld.gov.au; AlanP@msc.qld.gov.au; KevinD@msc.qld.gov.au; MaryG@msc.qld.gov.au; LenoreW@msc.qld.gov.au; AngelaT@msc.qld.gov.au; info@kurandaregion.org
Subject: Re: FW: Kur-world dam
Dear Peter Franks
I happened to see your recent email to Speewah resident Chris Harth re the proposed ‘Kur World’ development and take the liberty of responding to it.
Your letter raises a number of matters of concern, particularly regarding compliance and enforcement, but I wish to focus on just three sentences:
“Council and Councillors are required to be circumspect with regard to making comment about any proposal. While they may have personal view points, they are required to demonstrate that they have open minds on issues until such time as they have all the facts before them. As such, you will not see them making comment either opposing or endorsing this project itself.”
I find this comment astonishing, for the following reasons:
1/ Mr Harth’s complaint was about Councillors’ lack of attendance at a meeting organised by the Kuranda Region Planning Group. The KRPG, a broad alliance of residents, environment groups and residents groups in the Kuranda region, has organised two well-attended public meetings in two months on the Kur World proposal. Some 150 people were present at the second meeting. No Councillors attended on either occasion.
Must Councillors be so “circumspect” they’re required to avoid any direct contact with residents who raise questions about development proposals such as the Kur World?
You say that Councillors “are required to demonstrate that they have open minds on issues until such time as they have all the facts before them” How can they get all the facts if they don’t have contact with key stakeholders such as concerned local residents?
2/ Your remark that we “will not see (Councillors) making comment either opposing or endorsing this project itself” seems to me to be at variance with the facts.
A recent interview with Mayor Gilmore ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQTgMTSyqwk ) on ABC Far North indicates that the Mayor has liaised with the developer on multiple occasions and he clearly states strong personal support for the Kur World Proposal. Here are a few grabs from the interview:
- My Council.. has been briefed by Mr Lee and his company over a period of time
- It’s a very exciting proposal
- Mr Lee is a visionary
- He’s very, very concerned about the Myola Frog for instance and other wildlife corridors etc
- He’s going to make this thing work.. it’s very exciting indeed
- This is one of the new things that’s required for Cairns and the region for tourism to flourish
- Mr Lee has come up with a new plan. It looks very good to me.
Mr Franks, I appreciate that you are not a Councillor yourself – and that it may not be your responsibility to communicate with residents on matters such as this. Surely that’s primarily the role of our elected representatives?
However, if Councillors are so anxious to avoid contact with their electorate that they ask you to answer their correspondence, could you could please convey to them a personal opinion that this leaves a very poor impression in our community?
We don’t expect Councillors to agree with our views. That might be nice, but it’s not our initial expectation.
We DO expect Councillors to at least listen to widely-held community concerns – and not to make a pretence of impartiality when the facts suggest otherwise.
Yours sincerely,
Syd Walker
Kuranda
