Dear Editor
I was most interested to read, in Eve Curtis's book "The Turning Years" that in February 1983 a Tamborine Mountain, Community-wide survey was conducted by the TMPA.
The questions posed resulted in the following feelings being expressed.
- 80% or the population favoured limiting mountain population to 4000 residents.
- 94.5% did not favour more "Estate" type subdivisions.
- 82.9% did not favour higher density dwellings
- 80% favoured a maximum building height of two stories high
- 94.4 wished to see Tamborine maintained as a semi-rural community
- 95% did not favour "Gold Coast" type Tourist attractions
- 90.5% did favour tourist attractions, which make use of the natural environment and favour the use of rate monies to preserve the local environment
- 89.2% favoured a tree-preservation order
- 76.2% favoured a Tamborine Mountain shire
- A vast majority did not favour council's proposed sewerage scheme
History since has shown us that successive councils did not regard the community’s preferences as sufficiently important to resist the Tsunami of development that has turned the Mountain into what it is today, which is an unhappy compromise between Rates and Tourism incomes on the one hand and looking after the environment that once pertained on the other.
Sad to say, for the overwhelming majority of us this means we have lost and so-called progress or development has won.
If the convincing percentages above did not have the required result, how much less a chance do the objections of residents have (usually in the order or 12% of residents submit objections which meet council's criteria) for each unwanted development.
We obviously need to take much firmer actions than we have to date, but first we need an up to date survey of all mature aged residents, questions to be determined by, say the TMPA.
Once we know what we, as a population want, the firmer actions should commence.
I mean marching on Council, I mean physically preventing tree destruction and no doubt for a few of us this may mean being arrested, with the beneficial attendant publicity to follow.
Finally a couple of questions for today:
- Who really benefits from Tourism? Mountain businesses representing maybe 10% of the Mountain Population.
- Who does not benefit? The other 99% of resident whose environment and ambience is progressively eroded by each unworthy development, and whose roads and environs are clogged with visitors, dismayed because they can't park outside their shop of choice.
The big question is: Is Tourism development worth its cost?
Sincerely
Richard Peak