Dear F.O.B.A. committee,

With two more days of campaigning before election day you will hopefully understand that it is a very busy time for me and I cannot afford the time to be too elaborate in the answers that I provide.  I apologise in advance for the format of my reply ( i.e. placing my answers within your paragraphs ) as it is the quickest way that I can do it.  I will colour my answers in red so that it is easier to read. 

The Australand development.

There are many things about this development which are blatantly wrong and illogical.

Who told you the Australand development fitted in with the Town Plan? We believe you have not been given the full story. Perhaps you should have dug a little deeper on such an important issue to the residents you would like to represent.
To my understanding, for an application to be passed by Council it must fit within the Town Plan regulations.  That is why I believe that it fits within the Town Plan.

In your email, you say  you are "one of ....."the 7 in favour of the Australand 15 storey development.""

Does this mean that you agree with council and Australand that it is GOOD for Burleigh Heads?
The current site is ugly and in need of redevelopment.  That would be good for Burleigh.  However, I don't think 15 stories is the best outcome.

”This will really set the direction of any future development in Burleigh” Australand (GC Sun, 27/8/2003). You therefore agree with this statement?
This is not true.

Do you agree with the council and Australand that replacing 10 one bedroom units with 92 permanent units (1, 2 and 3 bedrooms) will lower the traffic?  If so, can you explain the logic?
I don't agree with that. 

Do you agree that more parking spaces should be eliminated so that the public footpaths can be widened to allow Australand to offer al fresco dining? Why isn't the al fresco dining included on their land rather than public land? Why do you believe that they should be able to use public land?
I don't want to see less car parking spaces on the street.  They (Australand) advised me they have complied with the number of car parking spaces set by Council within the development for the retail parking.  I personally like the concept of al fresco dining in our climate but not at the expense of public land.

Do you agree that 1 parking space is enough for 2 and 3 bedroom units and that it is then ok to cut this back even further by 20%?  What about the public parking opposite which will be severely reduced for the public? Surely we want more parking spots, not less.
Australand advised me that they have exceeded the amount of car park spaces required by Council for the residential section of the development.  My understanding is that the Council requirement for car parking for a two bedroom unit is 1.5 car park spaces.  I believe that this requirement is deficient.  My preferred formula would be one car park space for every bedroom in the unit.

Do you know the difference between H7 and H7 (H15) zoning? Remember that Australand had to apply for relaxation; it does not have an “as of right” to build to 15 storeys.
My understanding is that H7 is "as of right" to go to 7 stories.  (H15) gives the ability to apply to go to 15 stories if certain Council supplied criteria are met.

Do you agree with them that it is ok to put shops in the development even though it is illegal?
This, I think, is the most difficult question.  Shops on the ground floor are a good thing.  It allows public access to the site as compared to the "all residential" sites where the public are not welcome.  It ads colour and vibrance to the immediate streetscape.  However, if it is illegal it should not be supported.  Which leaves us with the problem that there are already shops on the site.  What should be done if they are illegal - I can't answer that.

Do you agree with their interpretation of gradation, i.e. that they compare its gradation to Surfers Paradise, Broadbeach and Coolangatta instead of just the local precinct?
No.  After viewing an aerial photo of the area, it seems to my eye that the site in question would be suitable for 7 stories, stepping up from the village and on to the higher buildings further north. 

Do you agree with the amount of landscaping that has been done (well below the minimum)?
When I viewed the artists impressions of the development, I must admit that I concentrated on the design of the building and not the landscaping.  I would assume ( but do not know for certain ) that Council have requirements for landscaping.  The development has been passed, so it would meet these requirements.  If it doesn't I don't support it.

Can you show us on Australand’s plan where there is the required 6 metres of landscaping between this development and the adjacent property?
No.

Do you agree with council and Australand that it is in the overall public interest? If you do, what do you say about the huge number of signatures against it, the residents who showed up for the rally, the letters submitted to council, the results of the GCB poll and the results of our poll? 
No.  The feedback that I have received is that the residents ( including myself ) are not in favour of 15 story Buildings in Burleigh.  

There are many more such questions about the development which you perhaps are not aware of.

Since you are in favour of the development, we will have to assume that you agree with council and Australand on the above and that you disagree with potentially 98% of the people you hope to represent. Who are you representing; council or the residents?
Residents.

We have been advised that the development doesn’t fit in with the Town Plan. Council, Cr Robbins & Cr Drake told us that if they didn't allow it, the developer would take it to court and council would lose. The same people told us that Indigo Blue would only be 15 storeys; it is now 20 storeys. Cr Robbins used the same legal standover tactics with Dr Karen Coates but she wouldn't be intimidated. Dr Coates won. The residents of Division 12 intend doing the same thing.

The point is that residents’ wishes and input are being ignored. They want someone to represent them and surely this is what a councillor should do.
I agree that a Councillor is there to represent the residents views.

To answer your statement about insulting anyone's intelligence, our members may have great difficulty believing that:
          this council always does what is best for the residents
         Australand's 15 storey development is good for Burleigh
         a candidate can agree with Australand's development & Australand’s vision
                     for Burleigh & then say he/she is protecting Burleigh’s village character.

How can anyone support the Australand development and then say that they are in favour of retaining Burleigh's village atmosphere? Our members have made it quite clear that they believe the Australand development will kill the village atmosphere.
I would again like to point out that I am not in favour of 15 stories.  If we give developers rules to work within and they do so, how can we argue.  What needs to change here is the need for more public consultation and some amendments made to the Town Plan.

Funding.
We believe the voters have a right to know about the funding of candidates before the election. Will you be releasing your funding before the election?

There have been rumours that some candidates may be funded by developers. We believe that rumours are not fair to the candidates and that the rumours should be stopped.

Are you being supported by developers? Do you know of any candidates being supported by developers? If so, which candidates and which developers?
I believe that it would be better to change the system so that all funding for all Candidates is declared before the election.  My wife and I have spent thousands of dollars on my campaign and we have received support from friends and businesses.  All the details will be supplied to the requirements of the law.

Information.
Greg, you accuse us of bias. We disagree; we are providing information to our members. We disclose all the facts we know so that members can make up their own minds. 

The polls have shown what the residents want. Irene is the only candidate who has been fighting for what they want on these issues. That is fact and it will be reported as such.

If you intend to fight for the wishes of the residents on these proven important issues to the residents, even though you haven't done so in the past, then we will certainly let our members know.

If you want us to send your answers to the above questions to our members or if we have said anything above that you believe is wrong and needs correcting, please let us know and we will email our members accordingly. 
I have answered these questions to the best of my ability.  Now I wonder how the other Candidates would have answered these questions, or more to the point - if they would have answered at all.  Greg Betts

Regards,
FOBA Committee.