Do you have an opinion to share? Submit a Letter to the Editor at Sunshine Coast News via news@sunshinecoastnews.com.au. You must include your name and suburb for accountability, credibility and transparency. Preference will be give to letters of 100 words or less.
- Read the story: Fresh push for new laws to curb caravan parking
Kelly, Currimundi: Come see the 14 vehicles we in Lakeside Crescent are currently having to look out on to. Council are not able to do anything but how is this fair? If you own one of these vehicles, or you are thinking of buying one, shouldn’t you be questioning if you can store it? Instead, we have to look out onto these eyesores.
Diane, Pelican Waters: Unfortunately these large caravans, mobile homes and sometimes boats on trailers are creating hazards for both motorists and bike riders. The areas they park in are often shared with bike riders. Bike riders then swerve out into a car lane as they have nowhere else to go. These large vehicles parked on the side of the road, sometimes for extended periods of time, block drivers from having a clear view of traffic, thus causing a road hazard.
Sacha Smedley, Ripley: In recent years, the development of suburban and urban areas has increasingly prioritised profit over practicality. Developers, councils and builders – often operating under policies that enable or even encourage overdevelopment – have been squeezing as many dwellings as possible into ever-smaller blocks of land. The consequences of this design model are now manifesting in everyday frustrations for residents, particularly those who own recreational vehicles like caravans, boats or camper trailers. Where once families could store these vehicles in spacious backyards or alongside generous driveways, we now find ourselves in suburbs where there is no backyard to speak of, let alone room to build a shed or park a trailer. Driveways barely fit a standard SUV, making it impossible to store a caravan off-street. Street widths are often reduced, further limiting viable parking options.
The push for higher-density living – in and of itself not a bad thing when done responsibly – has become a race for maximum yield per square metre, with little regard for the practical needs of modern living. This is not simply a matter of people buying vehicles they can’t store, it’s about the systemic removal of storage options by those who designed and approved these living spaces. Instead of recognising this as a planning failure, some councils are now pushing back on residents by cracking down on RV and boat parking in residential streets. It’s easy to demonise the individual – to say they are cluttering the streets or creating eyesores – but this ignores the root cause: corporate greed, poor oversight and policy decisions that ignored the needs of real people.
Furthermore, some suggest that owners should just pay for off-site storage is both unrealistic and discriminatory. Storage facilities are often expensive, hard to access and booked out. Many families use these vehicles frequently and need them nearby. Asking people to pay hundreds (or thousands) per year simply to store what they already own – because developers didn’t allocate appropriate space – is unjust, especially in a climate of high inflation and rising living costs.
The conversation around vehicle storage needs to be reframed. This isn’t about bad behaviour by residents, it’s about short-sighted urban design that failed to accommodate real life. If councils want compliance, they must also acknowledge their role in creating the problem and work towards affordable, localised and fair solutions, not just punishment and restrictions.
Susan Collings, Coolum Beach: I totally agree with the concerns already raised, and wanted to also add a cyclist’s perspective. We cycle in the left-hand shoulders of our roadways and with so many caravans permanently taking up that space we are forced onto the very edge of often-busy thoroughfares. This must also apply to school children riding to and from school. Or worse, we are dodging in and around vans.
Ruth Bonniface: We stay at the Maroochydore Beach Holiday Park for two months every year. We are very disappointed to see people camping day and night on the road outside our campground towards Cotton Tree. This is a designated four-hour parking zone that never seems to be policed. The campervans are parked along the street for several days at a time and sometimes there are as many as 10 of them. Some seem to obtain the code to the facilities in our campground and use the showers and toilets here. We pay upwards of $525 a week to stay here and it seems unfair that the council turn a blind eye to all the free campers in a prime position along the beach road.
Leslie Spann, Ingham: Council has itself to blame for this problem. The people who plan the suburbs make the roads too narrow and no ground is left in yards for toys. To all the people on this petition, toughen up. Don’t blame the people with nowhere to park anything.
Jennifer Gardner, Pelican Waters: Our streets now have so many vehicles parked anywhere the owners like. They are parked in spots next to parks so when you go there is limited parking because the homeowners think “I’ll buy a van boat, campervan, box trailer and park it anywhere I like”. They may be registered however I don’t believe this gives you the right to park where you like for months, even years. People who live in their cars aren’t allowed overnight. I believe all transport should be on the owner’s property or somewhere that is allocated and paid for.
Judith Cook, Sydney: I am a caravan owner but live in Sydney. I bet the 500 signatures don’t come from anyone who has a van. What I don’t read is where are we supposed to park them? What’s the alternative? Vans need maintenance and constant checking to keep the batteries, electrics and other parts in working order between trips. I would suggest that caravan owners could apply for a permit to park out the front of their property. I am aware owners of boats etc will park them outside other people’s properties and in other streets but this is often due to the size of them. Owners often park in other larger streets because their street is not suitable – too narrow and people living in units. So, I would propose that most owners do what they can to park responsibly. A proposal must be presented to the alternate parking options: you just can’t restrict or ban without this. There are lots of issues here and if you restrict to, say, 28 days, who’s policing that? To implement parking restrictions they have to be enforceable.
Dave Robilliard, Currumbin Valley: The councils should also ban parked boats as well.
Lynette Saxton, Yaroomba: My husband and I own a caravan and we have the space to keep it on our property, which is in a residential area. If we couldn’t do that we either wouldn’t have bought it or we would put it into storage and only park it in the street for 48 hours when we were getting ready to go away. I think that’s fair.
Neil Chapman, Dicky Beach: Caravans and trailers parked on Beerburrum Street, Dicky Beach, need to be moved on. Some are from interstate.
Helen Mohr, Maroochydore: This certainly has become a massive problem all over the Coast. Some people have become so self-centered they don’t even live anywhere near where the vehicle is parked. In Maroochydore, we’ve seen people lock up a van on the street and head home. This needs to stop. I agree that surely the council can erect signs on streets for unattended vans, boats, trailers to have a certain limit, with a large fine if not obeyed. Exactly the same as with overnight free camper signs and dog on-leash signs.
Wayne Wells, Alexandra Headland: I do not own any such vehicle myself but I urge the petitioners and council to consider the following points before any action is taken to ban this practice. The owners of these vehicles pay registration fees to be road users in Queensland, which includes on-street parking. Is it fair to restrict their right to park their vehicles, without compensation? Similarly, a portion of council rates goes to the provision and maintenance of local roads, which includes on-street parking. Are ratepayers who park recreational vehicles on their streets to be discriminated against compared to other residents who park their extra motor cars?
The article outlines that councils have the authority to restrict the parking of recreational vehicles, provided adequate signage is erected. For the council to erect such signage throughout the city and then maintain it would be a substantial cost. Should all ratepayers bear this cost for the sake of 500 petitioners? If a parking ban of these vehicles is implemented, there may then ensue additional costs to enforce it – for example, will modifications be required to council’s mobile parking identification system and/or procedure in order to distinguish between vehicles and/or their number plates?
It would be inappropriate to ban all parking of these types of vehicles at all times and in all circumstances, else travellers towing vans and/or trailers would not be able to stop on any road in the Sunshine Coast area. Therefore, any proposed ban would need to allow for such parking to occur for a reasonable time period. Would this be, say, 7, 10 or 30 days? Again, how would council’s parking identification system handle breaches over these time periods?
An alternative to providing reasonable, limited time periods for the on-street parking of recreational vehicles, as described above, would be for council to provide numerous dedicated parking areas for these vehicles throughout the Coast, such as those for trailers near boat ramps. I suggest the cost for this would be prohibitive and these areas may then become unofficial camping grounds. I understand that parking of these vehicles may be an inconvenience to some residents. However, I hope the potential consequences of any proposed ban are fully explored before any such implementation.
- Read the story: The Aussie housing mismatch
Graham Lockey, Coolum Beach: So Eliza Owen of property research firm Cotality wants a property tax to force people out of their homes. Where are we supposed to buy these smaller, cheaper homes? Certainly not in suburbs like the Aura development south of Caloundra, where the congestion is worse than a city centre – where houses are smaller, lots are tiny but prices are not lower than older homes in established areas. Those of us who own our homes achieved ownership through hard work and prudent financial management. Is our reward to be having a punitive tax imposed on us when we are least able to pay in times of ever increasing costs of living? Just so you know, Eliza Owen, my home is no ‘McMansion’! What people like Eliza Owen fail to grasp is that if you diminish the number of homeowners by taxing them out of their homes you automatically increase the need for subsidised so-called social housing, and increase pressure on the rental market in general. When are these ‘pie in the sky’ pilots going to realise that punishing achievers will solve nothing?
To solve the housing crisis there needs to be a dramatic increase in the supply, and a reduction in cost, of land and in the number of homes being built, coupled with a reduction in both regulation complexity and ‘on costs’, which have been estimated recently to add more than $50,000 to a new build price. Property tax on regular housing is simple theft, as it will contribute nothing to solving the housing shortage. Be very careful who you elect next time – you could be gambling with your house and your future, and your capacity to pay for aged care in your twilight years.
- Read the story: Cafe says farewell ahead of site’s redevelopment
Jenni Hesse, Pelican Waters: Allowing this site to become a childcare centre must be the most badly thought out decision ever made. The current parking at the shops is woefully inadequate. The majority of the shops are not for long-stay parking, just popping in to buy or collect an item. The two cafes there already will be severely impacted by even less parking due to trucks coming and going, to say nothing of these huge machines trying to navigate the roundabout and the parking down the side of the proposed building, or the noise and dust that will be flying around. Plus the constant noise of the children while trying to have a quiet coffee! Count me out.
Can I also ask where the parents of these children plan to park when they deliver and collect their children? It is not like a school where children leave the grounds and meet up with their taxi service. They won’t be catching buses either. There are also medical rooms and QML rooms, all of which require short-term parking. I can see this having a shocking backlash on our local village and I would hate to see any of these businesses shut up shop because of some madcap decision which has over ruled our council. Please overrule this decision before it is too late.
Maria Simmonds, Pelican Waters: Ask any local if it is a good idea to add 216 cars, at peak hours daily, to the already very busy Golden Beach single-lane main access road, and you will get a resounding no. Situating a two-storey childcare facility on the corner of a roundabout and cul-de-sac is stupid beyond belief and will cause major holdups every day to commuters who use the main road through Golden Beach. A small cafe on this site was ideal.
Martin Turner, Golden Beach: It seems developers can have sensible council decisions that are supported by local residents and their local council representatives overturned.
It would be hard to find a worse position for a childcare centre. It is situated on a corner block by a very busy roundabout, with up to 108 parents dropping off their kids. It’s very hard to find a parking spot now in Golden Beach shopping district. I’m not sure who the people are benefiting from this ridiculous court decision. I can’t imagine that the judge visited the site.
Simon Bestre, Parrearra: What a ridiculous location for a childcare facility, in the main street of Golden Beach. Yes, there may be critical need for the facility, but surely the main street should feature cafes, shops and other retail outlets, while service outlets utilise less prominent positions.
Read the story: Crackdown on feral pests and invasive weeds
Phillip Adamson, Maroochydore: I am a firm believer in eradicating the Bindi (not Irwin) weed, Soliva sessilis, but the council has allowed this noxious weed to run unchecked for so many years and in so many of the council parks around the Sunshine Coast area. This particular weed spreads very quickly among the grass and unless the council gets on top of the problem some major grassed areas of our parks will be unusable during the season it decides to send up its pickles. It’s not just us humans who find the piercing of our skin painful when the bindi weed prickle is stepped on but also our furry friends feel the discomfort as well.
We, the residents of the Sunshine Coast, should not allow the council’s Parks and Garden department to shirk their responsibility in eradicating this weed. I know they will not use a number of selective herbicides to eradicate problem weed growth, however the department needs to find an acceptable and successful bindi weed control and to do this at the earliest stage of spotting the weed rather than leave it to spread uncontrolled. This issue needs to be seriously attended to immediately.
Pauline H. Clayton, Kawana: The council’s feral animal team are efficient and effective, but the two invasive species not upgraded by the previous state government in the Biosecurity Act are Indian myna birds and fire ants. The Indian myna kills off our native birds, along with hollow log nesting mammals, while the fire ants destroy everything in their path. Will the new LNP Queensland government include this pair of invasive species for council funding to assist our officers?
- Read the story: Leash fine dispute leaves dog owner facing $3000 bill
Robert Harle: I think the dog leash laws are over the top. Categorising all dogs large and small, trained or not, is totally unfair.
- Read the story: Forum pushes urgent action on homelessness in town
Kaye Ellacott, Bli Bli: Another forum, hopefully there will be some sort of action this time. It is a disgrace to our local elected politicians to talk about it and have no real answers or understanding. It seems to me there is a lot of emphasis on growing the tourism dollar on the Sunshine Coast. I look forward to seeing the solutions for the homeless situation. Action is needed now.
- Read the story: Proposed master plan sets out vision for airport development
Anthony Robinson, Alexandra Headland: As a reasonably frequent traveller I find the Sunshine Coast Airport terminal experience to be very second rate. I have emailed the manger complaining about the inadequate PA sound system and his response was that they have improved it and ‘it is only a regional airport’. I haven’t noticed any improvement. With regard to the security screening debacle, this also needs addressing. Why do non-travelling visitors to the terminal require screening and why is this screening duplicated for international departures? Why isn’t the screening device not up to speed and currently can’t facilitate laptop screening so that they can remain included in your luggage? I’d be interested to learn of the management’s response.
Carolyn van Langenberg, Blackheath, NSW: The proposed upgrade of Maroochydore airport is ambitious. Is it feasible? Have the rising oceans and the riverine environment subject to floods been factored into the design? The future of the physical environment may not resemble the present. At the personal level, my greatest desire is for a good-quality sound system. I almost missed a flight from Maroochydore because the audio was so loud, I didn’t hear our name. Contradictory? No. My late husband needed assistance to board. The staff were calling for us. By happenstance, I heard ‘berg’ in the noise rattling from the intercom. Guessing we had better head towards the boarding gate, we made our slow way to frustrated cabin staff. They were both gruff and helpful.
- Read the story: Fieldwork and local insight guides huge rail project
J. Konrad, Peregian: Some want heavy rail, some rather buses. As it is too hard to make a decision (to please everybody), let’s just have a bit of both. Fast transport is about speed. However, if you have to change horses halfway through your trip, the journey not only takes longer but there is also more inconvenience, especially for tourists, to juggle your luggage from one mode of transport to the other. The Wave buses are the better option. So why not concrete a busway all the way? It’s cheaper, faster to build, less dangerous than railway crossings and a lot more flexible. To you in power: get real!
- Read the story: Crash hotspots pinpointed amid police warning
Carol Fraser, Maroochydore: Could something please be done about the intersection of Aerodrome Road and Sixth Avenue at Maroochydore? Every day we observe near-misses with cars and pedestrians due to cars doing illegal u-turns. Could signs be put on each side of the lights that say ‘No u-turns allowed’? Also one needs to be put on the turn from Aerodrome Road and Wrigley Street. People are too busy looking to see if the road is clear to the right to notice idiots doing an illegal u-turn right in front of them. A police presence would also be nice occasionally, to catch all the electric bikes and scooters going through red lights.
- Read the story: Plans lodged for 12-storey development on main street
Paul Cooperthwaite, Caloundra: As a resident of Maloja Avenue I wanted to voice my concerns regarding this development. The two major issues are the height and bulk of the development, which will dominate the area and will block the sun from many of the smaller four-storey buildings on Maloja Avenue, which will ultimately affect the value of the buildings and their liveability and attractiveness. It’s more than likely that the owners of properties on Maloja Avenue will lose millions in property values should their homes be dwarfed by these monstrous building. The developers are looking to make a profit at the expense of the residents of Maloja Avenue and Caloundra in general.
To allow a massive 12-storey development in an area where all the building are four storeys will ruin the family feel and amenity of the area and give it a Gold Coast over-development feel when most people coming to the Sunshine Coast come here for its laid-back low-rise feel and look. It also out of step with council’s own building approach and approvals where eight storeys was the most allowed.
The other major issue is the parking. Not only do the developers need to allow enough parking for the guests but also the visitors as well. There is very little street parking at the present and should this go ahead it will be horrendous.
Do you have an opinion to share? Submit a Letter to the Editor at Sunshine Coast News via news@sunshinecoastnews.com.au. You must include your name and suburb for accountability, credibility and transparency. Preference will be give to letters of 100 words or less.
