SPORK SUMMARY

SPRINGBROOK CONSERVATION AREA DAY USE AREA

SUMMARY OF ANNOTATIONS

SPRINGBROOK/WUNBURRA PROGRESS ASSOCIATION INCORPORATED

• Springbrook’s listing as a World Heritage Area should be the basis for all decisions made on the future of Springbrook.
• Rigourous research should form the basis of all of these decisions.

• The Springbrook Visioning Plan, that includes this proposal, has yet to have public submissions received – due 13^th June 2011.
• The future of Springbrook needs to be co-ordinated, not ad hoc or piecemeal.
• Open space preservation does not include the construction of roads, parking, play equipment, picnic shelters and public toilets.
• Community consultation was selective. Some residents and groups are repeatedly ignored and are never advised of Council’s intentions.
• The existing facilities at Apple Tree Flat are not difficult to access and are not over-used. The figures in the report are inaccurate assumptions.
•  There is a need to remove signs at Springbrook, not to add more. There are far too many now that rudely intrude into the experience of the natural environment.
• It is critical that the carrying capacity for Springbrook – residents and visitors – be determined prior to any further development of Springbrook. This development seeks to encourage and accommodate more visitors without knowing any limits.
• The report repeatedly uses words for their ‘sexy’ appearance and implications without proving any outcome will be possible or likely.
• The local community is working hard to achieve ‘nature’ outcomes in spite of Council. Council needs to be educated and encouraged to act responsibly.
• Locals at Springbrook are still discovering rare and endangered species and new species of flora and fauna even today.
• Green levy money is not meant for roads, parking lots, play equipment, picnic shelters and public toilets.
• Springbrook is not a city park: IT IS WH-LISTED FOR IT’S UNIQUE ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFANCE, NOT SUPERFICIAL SCENIC QUALITIES.
• It seems that work on this proposal has already started irrespective of community opinion.
• Only about one quarter of the residents of Springbrook have had a say on this development.
• The questionnaire has no objective controls or supervision and is open to manipulation.
• World Heritage should not be managed by public opinion.
• World Heritage does not stop at any boundary.
• Park developments like the one planned are available throughout Gold Coast City. Springbrook is World Heritage and should not be managed like everywhere else.
• The report is ambiguous on whether DERM approval has been received.
• Where are all of the studies that have apparently been done?
• Springbrook is not a village in a natural area. It is interspersed and fragmented.
• Springbrook Road is not a motorway needing development on ‘the right side of the road.’ Access to both sides of the road from both directions is simple and convenient.
• Speed should not be used to promote a development. It could make this proposal very unsafe and undesirable.
• There is no proof that this development will have no/minimal impact on World Heritage values.
• The questionnaire is loaded in that it has suggested uses and has provided no assessment of likely impact.
The report is full of contradictions and lacks objectivity.
It is a dangerous precedent to have Council ignoring its own processes and procedures.
The proposal cannot and should not be supported.