View Full Version : A storm brewing in the Sunshine State


AtD
October 25th, 2004, 02:04 PM
Australian Financial Review
http://afr.com/premium/articles/2004/10/24/1098556291464.html

Dark side of a Queensland sea change
Mark Ludlow and Stephen Wisenthal with Kathy Mac Dermott
25 October 2004


Queensland might be the boom state that has long benefited from "sea-change" southerners moving north to a better life and a near-perfect climate. But it has a dark little secret.

The recent power crisis, which showed Queensland had not been spending enough on its power distribution network over the past decade, is the tip of the iceberg of infrastructure problems Premier Peter Beattie does not want potential migrants and investors to see.

More than 1 million people are predicted to move to south-east Queensland over the next 20 years, and the Beattie government is only now coming to terms with the catch-up required to keep on top of the infrastructure needs of the fastest-growing state in Australia.

The Premier who loves describing Queensland as the "California of Australia" is frantically trying to adjust to the dark side of sea change.

The irony of California's power crisis, which was the downfall of once-popular state governor Gray Davis, is not lost on Beattie's critics, who believe he could suffer a similar fate.

While Beattie and his majority government are more than happy to surf the wave of economic growth with 1100 arrivals each week bringing new taxpayers to fill government coffers they are now facing the downside of growth.

"It's not too crowded. It's just our infrastructure hasn't kept pace with our growth," says prominent Queensland businessman Jim Kennedy.

"If all the politicians of all the political parties that have been in power over the last few years had built things for the future rather than just for the present, we wouldn't have this problem."

Queensland's chief executive officer of the Urban Development Institute of Australia, Brian Stewart, says new roads and better public transport are two critical issues if Queensland's quality of life is to be protected.

"There is certainly a very strong feeling that we are in catch-up with major infrastructure. What we need is more strategic larger items such as an upgrade of major highways and planning for transport infrastructure, such as a VFT [very fast train]."

Last week, Queensland Resources Minister Stephen Robertson warned that the state could be facing a water crisis by 2020 as the climate became warmer and the number of days over 35 degrees doubled.

Water and power infrastructure may be stretched to the limit, but Beattie the eternal optimist with his trademark toothy grin says 86,000 people moving north of the Tweed each year can only be viewed as a positive for Queensland.

"These problems like the population coming here are, at the end of the day, a strength for us, as long as we manage it," Beattie told the The Australian Financial Review.

"As a government we are looking five, 10, 20 years down the track. We are trying to adapt strategies for the future of the Queensland economy."

For Beattie, it's not just about building new schools and hospitals for interstate migrants, but creating a new knowledge-based economy to ensure the job-boom in the state continues.

"The real issue for us is to shift the cultural change in this state, which is happening. By cultural shift I mean everybody valuing what Smart State is about education, skills and training. We are building a new Queensland," he says.

He cites 5000 new jobs in aviation and 2500 new jobs in biotechnology as the first fruit of his strategy to move Queensland away from its reliance on traditional industries such as mining and tourism.

"Smart State strategy is changing the culture to one of innovation for new jobs. When people come the problem is not just finding them a home, not just finding them a school or hospital or road to drive or power to run everything, it's where are the jobs, where are the skills?"

"Skilling, jobs and education are the most important things to deal with that growth."

But amidst the hot air of the Smart State rhetoric which is espoused with monotonous regularity by Beattie and his ministers there are serious concerns about the ability of Queensland's road, rail, water and power infrastructure to cope with rapid growth.

A report prepared for the Civil Engineering Construction Alliance earlier this year found Queensland needs to invest a minimum of $1.4 billion a year on infrastructure to cope with a shortfall in spending by governments over the past decade.

It established that public capital investment in Queensland is about 76 per cent of the rate needed to maintain a similar standard and quality of infrastructure to NSW.

Paul Bidwell, general manager of peak business body, Commerce Queensland, says much of the state's infrastructure is at "crisis point".

"There is a real risk because of the real lead time to develop infrastructure. Energy, water and transport they've all got a long lead time. You can't start to fix them when you've got a problem."

Local researcher Michael Matusik says the cracks appearing in Queensland's infrastructure are starting to dent the flow of interstate and overseas migrants, with migration falling from 1300 a week last year to the current rate of 1100 a week

"The cracks should have been fixed five to six years ago, but they need to be fixed now," says Matusik.

John Mulcahy, managing director of Suncorp Metway, Queensland's largest listed company and a major lender to property developers, believes the Beattie government is finally starting to show signs of listening.

"I think that certainly the messages from the last budget from the Beattie government suggest that they are recognising the need for infrastructure investment. I'm pretty confident that Queensland will make the right investments."

"So far they've done a good job and I think they recognise pretty clearly that a lack of infrastructure will slow that growth."

In the 2004-05 budget, the Beattie government allocated $6 billion to capital works, up $1 billion or 19 per cent from the previous year.

In the aftermath of the damaging Somerville Report released in July, the government which fears continued power outages could cost it office at the next election has also fast-tracked $53 million in maintenance work to be completed before Christmas.

The matter was further complicated when Energex chief executive Greg Maddock committed suicide last month.

New Energex chief executive Gordon Jardine says he can't promise there won't be power outages over summer. But he is confident the existing network which faced growth of 13.9 per cent in demand last year will adapt to meet the needs of the growing population.

"My focus is on the coming summer and making sure we deliver the best outcome for all the electricity consumers in south-east Queensland," Jardine told reporters after his appointment last month.

"We've got plenty of money to do the job this summer, but the one thing we are short of is time. But the Somerville Report outlined the challenges to the power network and the company is up to the challenges."

One of the most obvious signs of Queensland's infrastructure problem is the worsening traffic problems, especially in the state's two biggest cities, Brisbane and the Gold Coast.

While traffic problems may pale in comparison with Sydney, locals have noticed a worsening in conditions during the past decade.

Car journeys that used to take 20 minutes are taking more than an hour during peak periods. Congestion on some key arterial roads in Brisbane and the Gold Coast is now being compared with peak-hour on Parramatta Road in Sydney which is not a good advertisement for newcomers trying to escape gridlocked southern cities.

Brisbane residents were getting so sick of traffic they elected Liberal candidate Campbell Newman as the Lord Mayor. Newman campaigned almost solely on anti-congestion and a pledge to build a five-tunnel orbital road to ease the capital's traffic woes.

"Transport and traffic is No.1 issue in south-east Queensland today," Newman told the AFR.

A poll conducted for Brisbane City Council found transport and traffic issues were more important than health and education.

Property adviser with KPMG and demographic expert Bernard Salt, the author of The Big Shift, says transport issues are more important to voters than other types of infrastructure.

"I think people vote on traffic, not on infrastructure like power or water," says Salt. "This is an issue that detracts from the quality of life of the individual on a daily basis. Every bloody day driving to or from work or to the shopping centre it's a constant reminder."

Another problem in some Queensland cities is water. Showers on Surfers Paradise beaches have been shut off for the past couple of years because of water shortages.

It is another sign in the daily life of Queenslanders that indicates everything is not perfect in the Sunshine State.

The founder and managing director of Queensland's second biggest company, Flight Centre, Graham Turner, believes a population cap is the answer to south-east Queensland's growing pains.

"That's the challenge there's just too many people," says Turner. "I think we're getting overpopulated in south-east Queensland and the government needs a policy to try to cope with that such as putting a cap on the population like they've done in Noosa. That's their major failing."

But Beattie rejects suggestions the government cannot cope with south-east Queensland's population expanding from 2.4 million now to 3.5 million in 2025.

He points to the establishment of the Office of Urban Management, headed by his right-hand man, Deputy Premier and Treasurer Terry Mackenroth, as an example of his government's active approach to adapting to the strains of growth.

The office which will act as a "planning body with teeth", forcing local councils to submit their plans to the state government to ensure development is not winning over environmental protection will release its draft plan for south-east Queensland on Wednesday .

"We expect there will be arguments with councils from time to time. The reality is the large part of development will be in the south-east corner, so we need to get that development right and manage it. And we will," he warns.

But many locals who have watched Brisbane grow from a large country town to a city that is predicted to overtake Melbourne in 15 years as Australia's second largest metropolis, fear the quality of life that once lured southerners may be lost.

"The city's beautiful, it's blossomed," says Kennedy. "But we're going to have to seriously address infrastructure, not just energy or electricity. Otherwise the city's going to plateau and get more and more unliveable and it's livability that's important."

Beattie agrees growth can create as many problems as benefits for a region that prides itself on its relaxed, laid back lifestyle.

"I love this place. The real challenge for us is to keep that quality of life," says Beattie. "Is growth a two-edged sword? Yes, but we are prepared for it, we are changing. We have avoided the Sydneyisation of Queensland."

But as long as Queensland continues to be the "engine room" of the Australian economy producing four out of every 10 new full-time jobs in the past year young families will continue to move north.

It is the opportunity to enter the housing market and to secure employment with the warm climate as an added bonus that is drawing interstate migrants, according to Matusik.

"To really reverse migration there would have to be falling job prospects," he says. Queensland's unemployment rate is 5.5 per cent a 23-year low.

Businesses too are being lured to Queensland, not just by the lowest payroll tax in the country (4.75 per cent) but by incentives grants offered by the Beattie government, which totalled $53 million in 2002-03.

But Salt warns the growth problems confronting Queensland are not just confined to the state's south-east. Sea change communities along the coast are struggling to cope with the influx of wealthy southerners who come to small towns to escape the cities but still expect metropolitan services.

"It may have been OK 20 or 30 years ago to just provide water, sewage and roads, but these days people expect a higher level of service provision from local authorities," says Salt.

"The dark side [of sea change] is not just the bleedingly obvious, such as roads and water although it is difficult to meet those. The pressures go well beyond that."

In the longer term, there are some real threats looming. Matusik says unless infrastructure issues are addressed Queensland is in danger of mirroring California which is now experiencing population loss and a raft of bad infrastructure problems in the next 10 to 15 years.

Queensland's time in the sun could ultimately fall under a similar shadow.

Dean
October 26th, 2004, 02:21 AM
interesting read

but do you think anyone actually proof reads this stuff???

'south-east Queensland's population expanding from 2.4 million now to 3.5 million in 2025.' (Which sounds correct but then they stuff it all up by saying this...)

'But many locals who have watched Brisbane grow from a large country town to a city that is predicted to overtake Melbourne in 15 years as Australia's second largest metropolis' (which is just a dumb brainless statement.)

Cheers

Dean - Melbourne

barneybuck
October 26th, 2004, 02:34 AM
interesting read

but do you think anyone actually proof reads this stuff???

'south-east Queensland's population expanding from 2.4 million now to 3.5 million in 2025.' (Which sounds correct but then they stuff it all up by saying this...)

'But many locals who have watched Brisbane grow from a large country town to a city that is predicted to overtake Melbourne in 15 years as Australia's second largest metropolis' (which is just a dumb brainless statement.)

Cheers

Dean - Melbourne

So true Dean and another thing Id think that Vic and NSW would be happy to see all the older people move to QLD as the health costs to keep the old bastards alive in the future will be horrendous.
So the "fantastic" migration north certainly has some dark sides to it.
I would think Beattie would be shitting himself about this looming problem.

Macca-GC
October 26th, 2004, 02:57 AM
Firstly, It's meant to say South-East Queensland will overtake Melbourne in 25 years.

Secondly, There's actually more young people moving to Queensland than there are old people. Particularly people in the 25-40 age bracket.

Thirdly, Beattie's not shitting himself. He's got no opposition.

Mr MacPhisto
October 26th, 2004, 04:05 AM
The Queensland Labor Party are solely to blame for this cock up. In 1989, the Nationals were prepared to build Wolfdene Dam (near Tamborine Village), which would have more than solved the South-East's water problems by now. In an effort to buy votes and win the seat of Beaudesert from the Nats, they pandered to landholders and killed it off.

After being elected the Goss Governmet then tried to sell land the Nats had purchased off locals back too them at greatly inflated prices. Fast forward 15 years and we are still waiting for Glendower dam to get started (a dam that will drown a substantial amount of quality grazing land as opposed to the shit, good for nothing probably UXO infested crap at Wolfdene).

I liked Goss (he was the perfect Labor premier after 30 years of conservatives), but he did nothing. One footy stadium grandstand and a couple of Bell rescue choppers are all that stand out from his 6 years.

Thank christ Borbidge got in for a couple years and upgraded the M1/Pacific Highway.

Since then Beattie has done nothing. The power crisis has been on the cards for years. What has he done?

This is what happens when you give a guy a 50 seat majority.......

Dean
October 26th, 2004, 05:16 AM
Firstly, It's meant to say South-East Queensland will overtake Melbourne in 25 years.


lol... how do you know??? Are you one of the writers???

btw... Melbourne's population currently around 3.6-3.7 million (and growing at 50,000+ per year) will be pushing 5 million by that time so im not sure how your statemant has any significance either.

Anyway, it's not my intention to start anything just wondering why no one seems to proof read their stories.

Cheers

Dean - Melbourne

barneybuck
October 26th, 2004, 07:09 AM
Firstly, It's meant to say South-East Queensland will overtake Melbourne in 25 years.

Secondly, There's actually more young people moving to Queensland than there are old people. Particularly people in the 25-40 age bracket.

Thirdly, Beattie's not shitting himself. He's got no opposition.
Ofcourse Beattie's not shitting himself about the pathetic opposition but long term the heath costs of the older interstate imigrants will impact on the QLD economy badly. The oldies might bring a short term boost to the property market but in the long run will be a massive burden on the State budget.

And BTW at the current rate Brisbane/GC will never overtake Melbourne/Geelong so get your facts right and stop dreaming..

tayser
October 26th, 2004, 07:49 AM
I wonder if the SMRT state planners (or at least the AFR journo) have seen these yet?

Vic.DSE Population estimates (www.dse.vic.gov.au/victoriainfuture)

In Short:

Victoria 2006: 5,077,000, in 2031: 6,225,000
Melbourne 2006: 3,681,000, in 2031: 4,538,000
Greater Geelong 2006: 208,000, in 2031: 270,000
Greater Bendigo 2006: 96,000, in 2031: 127,000
Ballarat 2006: 88,000, in 2031: 111,000

- over 5 million within 90 minute train journey (Vic RFR) of Melbourne in 2031.

Breakdown of Melbourne:

Inner Melbourne (MCC, YCC, CoPP) 2006: 270,000 population density: 2,854 ppsqk
--- 2031: 405,000 population density: 4,709 ppsqk
Eastern Melbourne 2006: 1,036,000 population density: 341 ppsqk
--- 2031: 1,127,000 population density: 378 ppsqk
Southern Melbourne 2006: 1,021,000 population density: 334 ppsqk
--- 2031: 1,298,000 population density: 448 ppsqk
Northern Melbourne 2006: 728,000 population density: 438 ppsqk
--- 2031: 856,000 population density: 537 ppsqk
Western Melbourne 2006: 628,000 population density: 422 ppsqk
--- 2031: 850,000 population density: 638 ppsqk

Metro population density change, 2006: 391 ppsqk, 2031: 513 ppsqk

All the suburban areas have a significantly smaller pop density as it includes massive slabs of open land inside each of the fringe LGAs.

ppsqk = people per square kilometre.

I think the Victorian DSE just wrecked the AFR journo ;)

Bluestar
October 26th, 2004, 09:13 AM
harhar I thought ppsqk stood for pipsqueak.

Never mind me, I'm sick today. Anyways, when I was living in Queensland a few years back and Wayne Goss and Rob Borbidge were in power, they were talking about their various strategic plans and options to cope with the influx and it seems that not much has happened but talk. Do state governments actually accomplish anything in this country?

Blue

JayT
October 27th, 2004, 02:37 AM
So true Dean and another thing Id think that Vic and NSW would be happy to see all the older people move to QLD as the health costs to keep the old bastards alive in the future will be horrendous.
So the "fantastic" migration north certainly has some dark sides to it.
I would think Beattie would be shitting himself about this looming problem.

Its lucky were getting the young then isn't it. The old tend to move back south when they get sick to be with family which is a common trend.

Also the largest group of people moving here are the 25 to 29 year olds who are educated and who bring with them their money, business and skills.

FIRST OF ALL WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS TO STOP SELLING ELECTRICITY TO NEW SOUTH WALES - that would buy us some time to build several more power stations. Let the other states worry about their own power. This whole NEMCO thing where states sell power to each other has its problems. Blackouts several weeks ago around Brisbane can be traced to problems with transformers in the Hunter Valley - which caused load shedding in Brisbane so that WE could supply Sydney.

jt

JayT
October 27th, 2004, 02:38 AM
Firstly, It's meant to say South-East Queensland will overtake Melbourne in 25 years.

Secondly, There's actually more young people moving to Queensland than there are old people. Particularly people in the 25-40 age bracket.

Thirdly, Beattie's not shitting himself. He's got no opposition.

Actually its 25 to 29 age bracket.

jt

JayT
October 27th, 2004, 02:41 AM
Ofcourse Beattie's not shitting himself about the pathetic opposition but long term the heath costs of the older interstate imigrants will impact on the QLD economy badly. The oldies might bring a short term boost to the property market but in the long run will be a massive burden on the State budget.

And BTW at the current rate Brisbane/GC will never overtake Melbourne/Geelong so get your facts right and stop dreaming..

In 2003 there was a difference in age of just 2 years between Victoria and Queensland in terms of Interstate Migration. This is because all the really old are moving back to Victoria to be sick and die with family.

Secondly the tide has turned and young are moving to Brisbane in big numbers - particularly from Melbourne which is loosing its young and educated to SEQ - See last weeks City News.

jt

barneybuck
October 27th, 2004, 04:06 AM
Its lucky were getting the young then isn't it. The old tend to move back south when they get sick to be with family which is a common trend.

Also the largest group of people moving here are the 25 to 29 year olds who are educated and who bring with them their money, business and skills.

jt

As usual just a bald statement from you,so can you back your assertion with some documented FACTS?

barneybuck
October 27th, 2004, 04:09 AM
Its lucky were getting the young then isn't it. The old tend to move back south when they get sick to be with family which is a common trend.

Also the largest group of people moving here are the 25 to 29 year olds who are educated and who bring with them their money, business and skills.

jt Oh and BTW with all this supposed new wealth and talent flowing into QLD you might be able to stop bludging off the VIc and NSW Taxpayers and pay for your own infrastructure.

JayT
October 27th, 2004, 04:24 AM
As usual just a bald statement from you,so can you back your assertion with some documented FACTS?

I am not going to type the entire article out but the source is Brisbane City News - last Thursdays edition. They are not on the net.

SO THERE!!!

JT

JayT
October 27th, 2004, 04:36 AM
While trying to relocate some "FACTS" for barneybuck I found another interesting stuff from the ABS. There are some cool maps too.

http://www.abs.gov.au/Ausstats/abs@.nsf/94713ad445ff1425ca25682000192af2/0b82c2f2654c3694ca2569de002139d9!OpenDocument

http://www.abs.gov.au/Ausstats/abs@.nsf/46d1bc47ac9d0c7bca256c470025ff87/fc77531037cb0d06ca256bcd008272ec!OpenDocument

jt

Dean
October 27th, 2004, 05:06 AM
I am not going to type the entire article out but the source is Brisbane City News - last Thursdays edition. They are not on the net.

SO THERE!!!

JT

Why are you such a wanker??? Just bcoz some two bit news article says it's so, doesnt make it so Jayt. Anyone with any sense would reaslise that. But since yr brains are 3 feet south of where they should be, i can understand.

speaking of facts, i remember you continually posting some stupid 'fact' about how GC has more than $20 billion worth of projetcs UC and you said 'and this is only for projects over 12 levels'

if you stopped and thought about things for a second you would realise that this is also a load of shit Jayt.

GC has currently about 30 towers above 12 levels UC. i hardly doubt that each of these towers adds up to about $800milion each since the most expensive (Q1) is worth about $450 million.

forget about finding facts jayt. fatcs and you just dont mix.

Cheers

Dean - Melbourne

Orfeo
October 27th, 2004, 07:15 AM
^^
Though I don't trust the City News particularly, the Courier Mail also ran an article in the same week pretty much saying the same thing: Young NSW and Vics, from a variety of backgrouds but a lot of them from non-capital cities. It made some guesses as why that might be the case (eg. Brisbane is thought to be cheaper, and closer than Perth or something). I've looked for the article online yesterday but couldn't find it. Because both the City news and Courier Mail articles came out arround the same time I'm inclined to think there was a recently released study that they got their data from. Who knows whether it was truthful... As far as I know the ABS hasn't released migration info for months

You're right about the $20 billion (http://www.villaworld.com.au/content/newsroom/NewsArticles/2004_03_22.asp) not being over 12 story's, it is just general construction projects either planned or underconstruction, of which about $13 billion (http://www.goldcoastaustralia.com/103157.php) worth of building are currently being built.

Dean
October 27th, 2004, 07:27 AM
^^Thanks for the clarrification. At least you have some sense. When i read what the dope had written i realised that is was for ALL types of housing and not just highrise over 12 levels. You try and be reasonable and tell him his mistake and he hammers you for being a typical 'Melburnian' who wouldnt know about the new queensland or some shit like that.

Cheers

Dean - Melbourne

barneybuck
October 27th, 2004, 07:33 AM
I am not going to type the entire article out but the source is Brisbane City News - last Thursdays edition. They are not on the net.

SO THERE!!!

JT

Just as I thought - from some pathetic parochial Brisbane paper.
BTW Beattie has anounced a 20 year plan that STOPS the GC and Brisbane joining up by trying to stop the urban sprawl..

Mr MacPhisto
October 27th, 2004, 10:16 AM
When are people going to accept the fact that the average journo doesn't know his arse from his feet.

Just because these people know how to write doesn't mean they know anything about what they are writing about.

The perfect example is the reporting of defence issues. They go for the sensationalistic angle (ie Collins Class Subs are shit) at the expense of hard fact.

The Courier Mail can't even get the little things right. According to them, the Bismark (second most famous ship in the world) was a destroyer, and our ANZAC frigates are also destroyers. A mere twenty seconds of research on the web could have cleared that up, but no, they had to print rubbish.

Regardless of whether they are talking about skyscraper heights, population figures or battleships, ultimately it's the deadlines that rule. Thay make the assumption (quite rightly) that 90% of readers have no idea what they're talking about anyway.

Thank heavens for the internet, and forums like this.

newy
October 27th, 2004, 11:48 AM
Is Beattie trying to stop GC and Brisbane joining, damn i wanted to see a huge metropolis of both cities combining one day but o well it must of been for a legitimate reason aye

TOCC
October 27th, 2004, 12:38 PM
^???^ no were all deeply dissapointed that there wont be plain old suburbia stretching from Brissie to the GC....

Anyway, one problem which has come up since the release of the new SEQ planning regulation(or whatever you like to call it) is that sugar farmers in SEQ will not be able to sell there land to developers now because its considered green space. Many of these farmers actually rely on the land as there retirement fund. And with transport costs and the profibility of sugar cane going down it is a dead end industry in SEQ. I think that Beattie is going to have to come up with some kind of compensation fund for the particular farmers. Also for those of you who didnt even know there was sugar cane in SEQ, well there is quite a dam lot in really good development posisiton as well, basically all around Jacobs Well is Sugar Cane which sits right on the banks of Moreton Bay.

I think its interesting how they have nicknamed 'Ipswich' the Paramatta of SEQ, in what way are they reffering to, are they trying to stem the growth from North-South and send it West or are they reffering to making Ipswich more of a City rather then a overgrown brisbane suburb as it currently stands

Drunkill
October 27th, 2004, 01:13 PM
The perfect example is the reporting of defence issues. They go for the sensationalistic angle (ie Collins Class Subs are shit) at the expense of hard fact.
you mean the Collins Street class subs :P

Macca-GC
October 27th, 2004, 01:20 PM
I think its interesting how they have nicknamed 'Ipswich' the Paramatta of SEQ, in what way are they reffering to, are they trying to stem the growth from North-South and send it West or are they reffering to making Ipswich more of a City rather then a overgrown brisbane suburb as it currently stands

I think they're trying to do both at the same time. They want Ipswich to be a real growth area, but become a little more independant of Brisbane. But they're not going to move all the growth out west. A massive are south of the Logan Motorway has been earmarked for development.

Blend
October 27th, 2004, 01:48 PM
ive not read half of this but ppl seem to honestly believe old ppl r moving here.

you realise we have a younger population than Vic, and NSW... are equal to WA, and only behind the northern territory.

This is bugging me that you people honestly believe that. The article itself was stating families are moving here for the jobs. Note: old people in retirement dont. have. jobs

get that stereotype out of ur head and realise the younger people are in NT, QLD and WA

Macca-GC
October 27th, 2004, 02:16 PM
After being elected the Goss Governmet then tried to sell land the Nats had purchased off locals back too them at greatly inflated prices. Fast forward 15 years and we are still waiting for Glendower dam to get started (a dam that will drown a substantial amount of quality grazing land as opposed to the shit, good for nothing probably UXO infested crap at Wolfdene).

Oi, Glendower won't be built. It's total yield is now about 60 ML/day. This is compared to 191ML for Hinze Dam and around 1,100ML for Wivenhoe.

And besides, there's concerns about water quality.

Blend
October 27th, 2004, 02:23 PM
GC has the major problem.
Build the dam in between Bris and the GC

you theiving barstards are tapping into our wivenhoe.


and also, there was/is a new powerstation being built at millmerran (past toowoomba)
Probably has to do with power outages.

Orfeo
October 27th, 2004, 02:37 PM
After reading the SEQ plan, or what is essentially a summarythrough the use dot points spread out on a few pages which giving very little away, I've decided that the whole thing is rather bizzare. The line about separating the 'urban zones' uses the term delineation. It is actually said that they want to "deliniate" Ipswich from Brisbane....um without knocking down a few thousand buildings that probably isn't going to be so effective.

I like the idea of areas becoming denser, but if any interesting projects are put forward the public will complain and the project will be stopped. How would a plan convince people that higher desity developements should go ahead? I doubt it will.

And anyway, who knows what will happen in the next 20 years or beyond. Stopped until 2026, then allowed?

By the way, one of the reasons Qld has a faster growing population is that is has a higher birth rate, so the number of young people is actually quite a bit larger than that of other states, and this is predicted to be the case even in 2052 by the ABS. So even with larger numbers of elderly people moving to qld this should form a mediating effect. But this has it's downsides: more state money has to go to education in comparison to other states...

And I will actually back up what JayT is saying (to an extent) that retired people may move to qld to enjoy themselves, but when they get really old and need care they often move back to where they are from if their family is there. The main situation I've heard of is where one partner dies and the other chooses to move away - they often return to their roots whether it is Townsville, Melboune, or Launceston. If you dont' have a family (or you dislike/hate them) this probably isn't going to be the case...

Macca-GC
October 27th, 2004, 11:03 PM
GC has the major problem.
Build the dam in between Bris and the GC

you theiving barstards are tapping into our wivenhoe.


and also, there was/is a new powerstation being built at millmerran (past toowoomba)
Probably has to do with power outages.


First of all, you're forgeting that GCCC and Redlands shire are the only councils in the Greater Brisbane area that don't rely on Wivenhoe as our primary water source.

Secondly, we're taking 85ML per day. This is nothing considering that Wivenhoe can provide 1100ML per day.

Thirdly, if we don't take the 85ML of water per day, we'll be running dry by 2007/08.

Forthly, you're going to be screwed by 2025 when Wivenhoe can't support all of SEQ. We're just waking you guys up to it by bringing it about 3 or 4 years earlier.

Fifthly, It's not just us who'll be taking water. The REGIONAL PIPELINE will also service Ipswich, Logan, Beaudesert and Redlands.

SO DON'T BE HAVING A GO AT US.

Also, a hydroelectric power plant is being built on Wivenhoe dam, so that will help out a bit.

greynurse
October 27th, 2004, 11:59 PM
This must be what all the fuss is about.
http://theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,11209051%255E601,00.html


Beattie plan to lock up the coast
Greg Roberts and Tony Koch
October 28, 2004

QUEENSLAND will lock up development of the nation's fastest-growing region encompassing the Gold and Sunshine coasts and push west most of the 1 million migrants it expects over the next two decades.The Queensland Government has banned development over 80per cent of the state's booming southeast corner to prevent what Premier Peter Beattie yesterday described as a "Sydney or Los Angeles urban sprawl" engulfing the region.

Mr Beattie said he was determined to accommodate the needs of the 1million extra residents expected to be living in southeast Queensland by 2026 without destroying the lifestyle values that attract people to the region.

But Mr Beattie's draft Southeast Queensland Regional Plan released yesterday says 25per cent of the 550,000 new dwellings needed for the population growth will be built along the corridor from Brisbane's western suburbs to Ipswich, an area 5C hotter in summer and 5C colder in winter.

"This is about guaranteeing our lifestyle for the 55,000 people every year who move here," Mr Beattie said. "Unless we get this right, the Queensland lifestyle we all enjoy will be destroyed. This is a significant challenge and what this does is to meet that challenge."

Under the plan, the region's five major population areas -- Brisbane, Ipswich, the Sunshine Coast, the Gold Coast and Toowoomba -- would remain separated by natural landscapes.

"Our five major urban areas will not merge into one urban sprawl as they have done in Los Angeles and Sydney," Mr Beattie said.

But conservationists slammed the plan, with Brisbane Region Environment Council co-ordinator Michael Petter saying: "This gives developers what they want and throws open our few protected areas to more use."

And Gold Coast and Hinterland Environment Centre co-ordinator Sheila Davis said the plan failed to protect koala habitat in the Redlands area -- the issue that led to the downfall of the Goss Labor government in 1996.

The plan predicts 250,000 more people will live in Ipswich over the next 22 years.

A delighted Ipswich Mayor Paul Pisasale said: "We are the big winners out of this."

An extra 500,000 people will live in Brisbane and other urban centres courtesy of higher-density re-zonings centred on public transport facilities.

In new "greenfield" subdivisions there will be 15 lots per hectare, up from an average of 9.5 lots in present urban subdivisions. The plan envisages more cross-river walking and cycling bridges for Brisbane and an extension of the Brisbane-Gold Coast rail service to Coolangatta.

But a second report detailing the infrastructure support needed to cater for the population explosion won't be released until next April.

Brisbane Lord Mayor Campbell Newman, speaking on behalf of the 18 local councils in southeast Queensland, welcomed the plan. "This is our last opportunity to act before the quality of life in this region is lost," Mr Newman said. Queensland Real Estate Institute research manager Fiona Bergin warned that focusing urban expansion west of Brisbane put upwards pressure on prices in the already burgeoning coastal property market.

Queensland Canegrowers general manager Ian Ballantyne said the region's 300 canegrowers had been penalised because they would be unable to subdivide their properties.

"The federal Government says growers should exit the industry and the state Government says they should stay put," Mr Ballantyne said. For Paul and Nicole Hodgson, who recently moved with their two chldren from Melbourne to Springfield Lakes on Brisbane's western outskirts, the predicted population explosion holds no fears.

"We lived in the inner city in Melbourne and loved it, but with our children approaching school age, we decided to move back to be with our extended families," Mr Hodgson said.

"You look around here and you see lifestyle. We can walk to any of the facilities.

"There are parks in which the children can run around and playgrounds around the lake with swings and the like."

Mr Hodgson, who works as a sustainability and innovation consultant, said the amenity was improved with the provision of barbecues in the parks around the lake, and he could catch a bus from Springfield to link with the electric train into the city.

He pointed out that the area was ideal for development because of the available vacant land and because the suburb had become popular as a quiet, convenient place for families, with established schools and business centres. "The traffic is not a problem now because the design of the suburb cuts out any noise problem, and the design of the streets doesn't allow rat-runners to operate," he said.

Mr Hodgson said the only possible problem he saw for the future was the provision of highway infrastructure.

"West of here on the Ipswich highway is a well-known bottleneck, but the Lakes area here is not affected by heavy traffic flows," he said.

"There is no need for that to deteriorate if authorities ensure that highway infrastructure keeps pace with increased population."

Mr Hodgson said he and his wife intended to rent for a few months and then purchase land on which to build in the suburb.

Blend
October 28th, 2004, 03:54 AM
i dont know whether to like it.. or not.

Either way Brisbane gains most of the population (750,000+)

and we also are lucky enough for things to be zoned denser, which means upwards building :D

Randwicked
October 28th, 2004, 04:18 AM
"Our five major urban areas will not merge into one urban sprawl as they have done in Los Angeles and Sydney," Mr Beattie said.

Har, Brisbane has worse sprawl than Sydney for its population. Beattie's an ass.

tayser
October 28th, 2004, 04:22 AM
how is Central Brisbane going to benefit from having the growth shifting from the South East of the city to the South West? it's just going to create another Gold coast! :ohno:

Blend
October 28th, 2004, 04:41 AM
Ipswich is still Brisbane. People who live there will still be part of Brisbane. Therefore Central Brisbane will benifit from it the same way as if they moved to Pine Rivers or any other place.

and there is no seperation between brisbane ans ipswich as they are suggesting lol. bloody liars

Orfeo
October 28th, 2004, 04:53 AM
^
That is my point: they talk about 'delineating' Ipswich and Brisbane but I have no idea what they could possibly mean...you would have to knockdown untold houses to pull it off. And for what use? The two are very close.

JayT
October 28th, 2004, 05:11 AM
Why are you such a wanker??? Just bcoz some two bit news article says it's so, doesnt make it so Jayt. Anyone with any sense would reaslise that. But since yr brains are 3 feet south of where they should be, i can understand.

Cheers

Dean - Melbourne
LOL - you can understand because you are a a wanker or you have your brains 3 feet sout of where they should be? Probably Both - LOL.

speaking of facts, i remember you continually posting some stupid 'fact' about how GC has more than $20 billion worth of projetcs UC and you said 'and this is only for projects over 12 levels'

Actually its 22.4 billion and its the entire Gold Coast including Tweed which accounts for about 4.0 billion dollars worth of projects. Also its not just buildings its all projects both infrastructure and private over $10 million dollars!

Get it right for gods sake.

jt

Dean
October 28th, 2004, 05:21 AM
good come back jayt

but you're still a dick.... and then some.

Jimmy James
October 28th, 2004, 02:11 PM
I am not going to type the entire article out but the source is Brisbane City News - last Thursdays edition. They are not on the net.

SO THERE!!!

JT

Sorry JayT but I'd take City News with a grain of salt - it'd be like me quoting facts and figures out of the mX!

As someone who moved from Canberra to Brisbane to Launceston to Geelong (work in Melbourne), I can tell you I am neither sick nor dying, I am however encouraged by wide roads, comprehensive (if sometimes frustrating) PT and higher pay for my work! I still miss Brisbane, but I don't miss the low salaries in relation to other cities - justified by lower cost of living which has been all but negated by the GST.

On a slightly unrelated topic I also don't miss Fatcat, Marto and Lisa - The Cage is far superior - Brisbane you're missing out!

Jimmy James
October 28th, 2004, 02:14 PM
When I was a kid I travelled to Bris with my Grandparents and I remember Ipswich being kinda separate - probably before the motorway - but now they are absolutely linked at Carole Park and Camira, The Logan Mwy is the official boundary!

ABS
October 29th, 2004, 12:01 PM
If they want to separate Ipswich from Brisbane all they need to do is demolish Bundamba, Ebbw Vale and Goodna. No big loss really... :lol:

Macca-GC
October 29th, 2004, 02:38 PM
Or lets just demolish everything south of the Ipswich Motorway, west of the Centenary Highway, and while we're at it, lets demolish Inala. Wouldn't we all just be devistated to see that happen.

It'd be like demolished all of South-Western Sydney. Ah. Oh how it is sweet to dream.