You are here

Proposed Nosworthy Park bridge and pathway to link Brisbane Markets to Corinda

35 posts / 0 new
Last post
John Nightingale
Last seen: 2 years 5 months ago
Joined: 03/03/2010 - 1:04pm
Proposed Nosworthy Park bridge and pathway to link Brisbane Markets to Corinda

On seeing surveyor's pegs and various engineers messing about at Nosworthy Park, I spoke to the Lord Mayor at the Rocks Riverside Park Festival. His reply is attached. He makes it clear that Council has decided to build a bridge across Oxley Creek at Nosworthy Park and will not consider alternatives. However, there are no funds for building this infrastructure as yet, only $70,000 to complete plans. There is still time to call Council to account and perhaps change to a more suitable plan.


Council's proposal is to build a bridge from Oxley Creek Common, across Oxley Creek, to provide a route from the Common and Brisbane Markets to Corinda Stations and High School. A brief consultation a couple of years ago with Councillor Johnston revealed that the most direct and simple route would be to cross the creek at Kennard St, with a concrete path from Sherwood Rd through the southern most lawns of the Common to the bridge.


Since that time Council has worked, away from the public gaze, on the plan that has resulted in this proposed bridge into Nosworthy Park. A concrete path to this point from Sherwood Rd is, of course, much longer than to a Kennard St bridge, the concrete would then wind up the hill to existing concrete pathways at the top of the hill, just north of the Graceville Bowls Club, to Hall Ave. Bicycle Awareness Zones will then be stencilled onto the road pavement to guide cyclists to Corinda Railway Station and Corinda High School. An aerial photo with the proposed bridge and path is below, along with the alternative at Kennard St.


This project raises a number of questions.

  1. Is this location environmentally sensible? Nosworthy Park Bushcare Group, Oxley Creek Catchment Association, Birds Queensland and the Friends of Oxley Creek Common have all expressed strong concerns. Oxley Creek Environment Group would also be interested.
  2. Is this the most convenient and accessible location? Clearly not. Gradients and length of this proposal are all worse than the alternative.
  3. Is this the most cost-effective way to make this connection? It doesn't look like the cheapest option, a lot more concrete, a bridge just as long and more difficult terrain for earthmoving equipment.
  4. Will this bridge be used by commuter cyclists, for whom direct and fast routes are important? As a commuter cyclist I can say I wouldn't use it to get to the Markets from Corinda. Corinda High School has also expressed doubt as to the usefulness of this route to its agriculture students, due to time constraints. They would continue to use a bus until a direct crossing from the school to the southern part of the common is built.
  5. Does this route comply with the requirements for Crime Prevention though Environmental Design? Unusable at night, few if any fellow travellers on the track most of the day, an invitation to the criminal element.


The route Council has rejected, at Kennard St, would appear to the layperson to be superior on a number of grounds; more direct, far better gradients, close to neighbours at the Creek crossing, lower impact environmentally andmuch shorter.


Yet another alternative, though one that doesn't directly connect Corinda to the Common, would be a pathway around the south eastern perimeter of the Bus Depot, from Kennard St to Sherwood Rd. This would be far cheaper, be well lit at all hours, would connect to the southern footpath of Sherwood Rd, which already exists in form if not as a pavement as yet and would eliminate the need for a bridge completely. This route would appear to avoid all five problems raised above.


A bridge across the Creek, preferably well south of Nosworthy Park (beyond Ambiwerra) would be a great asset to the neighbourhood, but no such bridge would ever be able to attract workers at the Markets or other commercial and industrial premises, commuters to the city or eastern suburbs let alone sport cyclists. Such a bridge would remain a mainly recreational asset, as would the currently proposed project. A Kennard St bridge might attract commuters.


In summary, the proposed Nosworthy Park bridge and bikeway fits the Council's practices of 20 years ago, of the original Kedron Brook cycleway ­ it is purely recreational and obeys the rule of such paths, being the longest distance between its start and its finish, traversing, and concreting over, parkland.


A text version of Lord Mayor Graham Quirk's letter appears below.


16 September 2011


Mr John Nightingale

Corinda QLD 4075


Dear Mr Nightingale


I refer to your conversation of 23 July 2011 with one of my staff members at the Centenary Rocks festival at Rocks Riverside Park, about Council's plans for a new bridge crossing and bike path at Oxley Creek, Corinda.  I apologise for the delay in responding to you.


I undertand Ms Linda Austin, Communications Office within Council's City Projects Office, contacted you on 24 August to discuss this matter.  I note that your main concerns were Council's consultation with environmental groups and the preferred location of the bridge.


The project you refer to is called Oxley Creek bikeway stage two and was initially scheduled to start construction in the 2010/11 financial year.  However, as a result of the devestating floods in January this year, the project was deferred so the budget could be reallocated to assist with flood recovery works.


You may be aware that the Oxley Creek bikeway stage two is to be constructed in two phases.  The first phase includes a shared pedestrian and cycle pathway from the Brisbane Markets to Oxley Creek Common.  The second phase includes a shared pathway from Oxley Creek Common to Nosworthy Park, with bicycle awareness zones to Corinda Rail Station and Corinda High School.  Council has funds this year to finalise the design, with funds to construct the bikeway yet to be allocated.


 Once completed, the bikeway will connect to the recently constructed Sherwood Road and Brisbane Markets entry intersection.  This signalised intersection provides a safe crossing of Sherwood for pedestrians and cyclists.


I can confirm that Nosworthy Park has been identified as the preferred bridge location as it provides a more direct route to Corinda Rail Station and Corinda High School.  In addition, this location is preferable to the alternative location of Kennard Street (near the Sherwood Bus Depot) as the bridge would have to be significantly longer at this point in the creek, which would cause a greater environmental impact on the surrounding area.


The preferred alignment into Nosworthy Park will take the existing terrain of the slope into consideration and will be designed to minimise the area of path and gradient for both cyclists and pedestrians.  The project team are aware of the sensitive environmental considerations for this project and acknowledge the terrific work completed along the creek and within the parkland by the many environmental groups for this area.


Council is committed to addressing environmental concerns and working with local community and local environmental groups.  It is expected that the project team will meet with the local environmental groups to discuss the design and to implement replanting programs and other suggestions, wherever appropriate, within the 2011/12 financial year.


I encourage you to stay in contact with Ms Austin on 1800 699 416 or by email at for further updates on this project.


Thank you for contacting me with your concerns.


Yours sincerely

Graham Quirk

Lord Mayor

Ref: LM35260-2011

Nicole Johnston
Last seen: 8 years 3 months ago
Joined: 19/08/2009 - 8:48pm
Email Letter from Cr Nicole Johnston following resident enquiry

From: Tennyson Ward []
Sent: Wednesday, 12 October 2011 4:25 PM
Cc: Margaret Maynard
Subject: Dr Maynard
Dear Mike,
thank you for forwarding a copy of the letter from Dr Maynard. I am glad you did as the issue is somewhat different to what you represented to my staff.
The issue is much broader than that of just footpaths and is essentially the route, scope and location of the proposed Corinda / Oxley Common bikeway.
The Nosworthy Park option is controversial (and not supported by local residents and there are environmental concerns) and has not been the subject of any consultation by Council. I understand that Cr De Wit made the decision to locate the bikeway in Nosworthy Park, despite having promised to undertake consultation. I am aware that some residents have been told by the Lord Mayor that the preferred route has been decided. Council officers who met with me last year also promised that consultation would be undertaken.
Council has not done any consultation to date with residents. I have provided a fair bit of feedback to Council which, as far as I know, has been ignored.
Council (via Cr De Wit and Cr Prentice) has refused my written suggestions to include off-road footpaths on the connecting streets and is planning "bike awareness zones" instead as part of the planning.
I completely agree with the points Dr Maynard has raised. Council is not listening to me or residents and has not consulted with them as promised.
There are new footpaths in Corinda approved through the Tennyson Ward Footpath Trust Fund but awaiting construction in Hassall Street and Merewether St.
Nicole Johnston
Councillor for Tennyson Ward
Fairfield Gardens
180 Fairfield Rd
Fairfield QLD 4103
T: 07 3403 8605
F: 07 3403 8607

Last seen: 2 weeks 4 days ago
Joined: 10/07/2009 - 10:49pm
Council promise community consultation

Attached is a copy of a council letter provided to WTSAG.  The email is addressed to Nicole Johnston advising that community consultation will take place on the bikeway and will start on 30 November.
The text of the letter appears below:

Cr Julian Simmonds
Chairman for Public and Active Transport
14 Oct 2011
Councillor Nicole Johnston
Tennyson Ward Office
Fairfield Gardens
180 Fairfield Road
Dear Councillor Johnston
Re: Oxley Creek bikeway stage 2 - Corinda to Brisbane Markets Project introduction
Further to the meeting held with you on 10 December 2010, Council is pleased to advise that we are continuing with the planning of the new shared cycle and pedestrian pathway via Oxley Creek Common.  The project is part of Lord Mayor Graham Quirk's commitment to provide $100 million in new bikeway infrastructure over four years.
As you would be aware, construction of the bikeway was originally expected to commence in 2011, however due to Council prioritising flood recover work, the project was deferred and is now anticipated to begin in 2012.
The project team will now undertake the following activities to seek community feedback about the project in the coming weeks:

  • distribute a project newsletter to households and businesses surrounding the project location
  • offer meetings to key stakeholders such as environmental groups, Corinda Bowls Club and directly impacted residents

The community feedback period will be open until 30 November 2011.
The Oxley Creek bikeway stage two will ultimately link Corinda Rail Station and Corinda High School and surrounding streets in Corinda to Sherwood Road businesses in Rocklea across Oxley Creek Common.  The bikeway will provide access to key destinations within the local area, while also serving as an important missing link in the local Corinda and Sherwood bicycle network.
Key features of the project are proposed to include: 

  • constructing new shared pathway from Nosworth Park to Brisbane Markets
  • installing a new shared bridge across Oxley Creek from Nosworthy Park to Oxley Creek Common wetlands
  • installing approximately 650 metres of shared pathway on Sherwood Road
  • installing Bicycle Awareness Zones of the western side of the creek to connect the new pathway to Corinda Rail Station and Corinda High School

A copy of the proposed bikeway alignment is enclosed for your information.  This plan has not altered since the previous briefind held with you.
Yours sincerely
Councillor Julian Simmonds
Chairman for Public and Active Transport

Allan Howard
Last seen: 6 months 1 week ago
Joined: 17/07/2009 - 8:56am
How to do proper consultation

This article on Brisbane Residents United website indicates how Community Consultation is supposed to work and BCC's intention to utilise best practice, so council still has much to practice

Last seen: 6 years 4 months ago
Joined: 17/08/2009 - 11:26am
Lack of Consultation

One should not be surprised by the lack of consultation by this Council. It follows the same patterns Campbell Newman undertook when he disregarded the local residents over the Bus Depot.
This isn't about the right outcomes for the community. It is all about politics and the next Council election when the LNP can highlight how much money they have spent on bikeways, and how many kilometres of bikeways they have built. The same goes for the completion of the bus depot before the next election.
It doesn't matter that the bikeway and bridge is in the wrong location and residents don't want it there. All that matters for these self-serving Councillors is being re-elected.

Last seen: 6 years 9 months ago
Joined: 02/06/2010 - 9:11am
Proposed Nosworthy Park Walkway and Bicycle Bridge

 I have recently been told that plans for a pedestrian/cycle path and bridge over the creek at Nosworthy Park to connect Corinda railway station to the Rocklea markets via Oxley Common are well advanced. I am extremely disappointed that there has been to date no community consultation with immediate residents, given a letter to me of 29 Nov 2010 from the Lord Mayor saying he fully intended to do this before anything went ahead. I don’t believe any meeting ever occurred. In a phone call a few weeks ago from the council in response to another letter, I was told that the scheme was on hold due to its expense. It seems that the council will now consult in November which is a quite unsatisfactorily short time for a proposal of this kind and why are there two different stories being told. It is an insult to the community to consult when things are so advanced. Moreover this extensive new development was not discussed as part of the Neighborhood Plan.
   I have a number of concerns.
1)   What is the rationale for this proposal? Are there any statistics for the number of people likely to use it - just recreational users? Is such a likely expense warranted? If recreational use only, there are more suitable crossing areas. If it is for schoolchildren, it is quite some distance from Corinda High. Has an environmental assessment been done? Oxley Creek is, as I understand it, still polluted. Would not cleaning this up be money better spent.
2)   Any additional traffic/parking around Nosworthy Park is undesirable to residents and I would imagine the Bowls Club who are now making use of the Club and parking much more than in the past. For events at Oxley Common, people would simply park in Corinda. As it is, the road car parking is getting worse and worse on both sides of access roads. To add a dedicated cycle path, in my view, is not sensible.
3)   If there is to be a bikeway, residents especially the many people who walk the streets need to be consulted. There are no council concrete paths on Donaldson, Clewley or Hassall streets (below Clara St). Considerably increased traffic in the neighboring streets will make bikes quite dangerous for us pedestrians, older people and those with wheelie walkers or prams, who have to walk in the road because the verges are uneven.
4)   It is my strong preference to keep Nosworthy Park as a discrete park where often very small children can play freely and not have the addition of a bike through way that could be dangerous. There is at present a basketball facility which is very well used and would no doubt have to be removed. Young people play football in the direct path it seems of such a proposed cycle way. Are you intending to reposition the fairly new toilet again? I think that any change to the current park use would be highly regrettable.
5)   In terms of security a walkway would provide a welcome getaway path for intruders. I urge the Council consult with Corinda ratepayers on this. I feel that the early good will in terms of consultation has evaporated and decisions are being made without due consultation.
             Margaret Maynard

Last seen: 6 years 9 months ago
Joined: 02/06/2010 - 9:11am
Lord Mayor's response to my email
8 December 2011
Associate Professor Magaret Maynard
86 Donaldson Street
Dear Professor Maynard
Thank you for your email of 12 November 2011 about the Oxley Creek Bikeway Stage 2.
I understand you attended a meeting with Mr Adrian Ford and Ms Rush Cushley from Council's City Projects Office and Ms Stephanie Edwards from Council's Active Transport branch on 9 November about this matter.
For ease of reference I have attached the answers to your additional questions to this covering letter.
Should you have any further questions about the project, please call the project information line on 1800 550 712 during business house or email
Thank you for taking the time to write to me with your concerns.  I trust this information has been helpful.
Yours sincerely,
Graham Quirk
Ref: LM38709-2011
LM48709 - Answers to Questions of 12 November 2011
1) Can you provide me with full comparitive costs between a bike/walking bridge at Sherwood Road across Oxley Creek, a bridge and pathway at Kennard St and the Nosworthy bridge proposal and its widning step and lengthy pathway.
At this stage of the planning no comparative costs are available, however I can advise the Nosworthy Park bridge location would be approximately 17 metres shorter than the Kennard Street location.  This will have less environmental impact as it will require fewer pylons in the creek, less tree clearing and will be less expensive to construct.
2) If a commencement to the path is to be sited at the vehicular gateway of Nosworthy Park which seems to be what is being proposed, this would mean two pathways across the park.  The existing one and an additional 3 metre pathway cutting the park completely in two.  This will render redundant the current playing area used for cricket and football.  It will confuse and render dangerous the approach to the present toilet.
I am pleased to advise the project team are happy to look into removing sections of the existing walking path through Nosworthy Park to avoid having two separate and intersecting paths through this part of the park.
I understand your concerns for safety around the existing toilet block and basketball court in Nosworthy Park.  The location of the proposed path, however, allowss for appropriate clearance on either side of the pathway and is not expected to obstruct access to the toilets of create dangers for cyclists and park users.  It is also expected that pathwya and park users will exercise personal care and responsibility while using the park and pathway.
3) Have you any evidence that Corinda high school would find the bikeway a useful way of getting students to and from Oxley Common.
The project team is currently in consultation with a range of stakeholders in the local area, including residents, environmental groups and schools about the preliminary design and alignment.  Council will inform the community of the outcomes of the consultation and how it has influenced the final design and alignment.
4) Could you please find out the ultimate use to which Oxley common will be put.  The proposed bikeway could end up as a useful entrance way to all kinds of future public development/s and increase suburban parking in Corinda.

I am unable to comment on this issue as this land is currntly owned by the Queensland Government.  Please contact the Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation on 13 25 23 for more information on future planning for Oxley Creek Common.
5) What precise statistics do you have for commuter as opposed to recreational bike use for this proposed bikeway that would link Corinda station and Rocklea.  I personally have not seen more than one person with a bike on a train in all the years that I have been a most regular train user.
Whilst it is difficult to estimate exact usage following construction of the proposed pathway, I can draw a comparison from existing shared pathways that follow creek corridors in Brisbane for your reference.
For example, the Bicentennial bikeway (follwoing the river between Toowong and the CBD) is one of Brisbane's busiest pathways for commuting.  An October 20101 count shows an average of 4,500 path users on weekdays and 3,000 on weekends.  This is compared to the Enoggera Creek shared pathway at Ashgrove, which counted an average of 550 path users on weekdays and 700 on weekends.  The Bulimba Creek shared pathway at Carindale is similar.  In 2010, counts showed an average of 300 path users on weekdays and 400 on weekends.
The lower numbers of path users at the Enoggera and Bulimba Creek sites suggest the path is used more for recreation, compared to the Bicentennial bikeway which has usage highly concentrated at peak commuting times in the morning and evenings.  Therefore, I would expect the Oxley Creek bikeway would have a greater recreational use.
6) Why has this bikeway seemingly been given priority over other council public works.  For instance is it not more important to attend to the pollution levels in Oxley Creek.
The budget for this project and many other similar projects across the city was granted under the 2010/11 budget.  Following the January 2011 flood, these projects were postponed and were only just recently added to the project delivery program again.
While I agree with you that water pollution is an important area to addres, each division of Council, including the Water Resources branch, has their own budgets to manage.  In consideration of the abovementioned, I can assure you this project has not been given priority over any other Council projects in the area.
Last seen: 6 years 9 months ago
Joined: 02/06/2010 - 9:11am
Proposed Nosworthy Park bridge and pathway - Consultation?

This morning (17 October) we got a flyer inviting comments on the proposed bikeway. The letter to Nicole Johnston of 14 October says the council will offer actual meetings with groups of stakeholders. This is not mentioned in today's flyer. They are going against their promise yet again.
Margaret Maynard

Daniel Benz
Last seen: 6 years 8 months ago
Joined: 23/08/2009 - 8:59pm
Proposed Nosworthy Park bridge and pathway flyer

Margaret Maynard, are you able to scan a copy of flyer and put up on this site?

John Nightingale
Last seen: 2 years 5 months ago
Joined: 03/03/2010 - 1:04pm
Flyer's assertions

To quote:
"Council initally investigated building the bridge at the end of Kennard St. However, the bridge in this location would cause greater environmental impacts. Placing the bridge at Nosworthy Park provides a more direct route to Corinda Railway Station and Corinda High School."
I have to bow to superior knowledge. But I doubt it resides in Council on this issue. I'd rely on OCCA, FOOC, ECOG, Birds Queensland and Nosworthy Park Bushcare Group for judgement on environmental impacts.
As Margaret Maynard points out, the flyer invites us to phone, email, post a letter or view a larger copy of the plan (ie, the picture). It clearly does not envisage any public meeting.
I accuse Council of choosing the route that maximises bikeway length in order to ease the problem of fulfilling political commitment to xxxKm of bikeway by the election after next.
PS, I will scan my flyer and send to our webmaster to mount.

Last seen: 2 weeks 4 days ago
Joined: 10/07/2009 - 10:49pm
Council Bikeway Flyer attached

Attached is a copy of the council bikeway flyer sent to residents (no information yet on the area covered).  Also below appears the text of this flyer.

Brisbane City Council is seeking community feedback on a new shared cycle and pedestrian pathway to connect the suburb of Corinda through Oxley Creek Common to the Brisbane Markets.
The project is part of Lord Mayor Graham Quirk's commitment to new bikeway infrastructure.
The project is planned to be constructed in two stages:

  • stage 2a - Brisbane Markets to Oxley Creek Common
  • stage 2b - Oxley Creek Common to Nosworthy Park and bicycle awareness zones to Corinda Rail Station and Corinda High School.

The proposed bikeway aims to provide improved safety for cyclists and pedestrians and encourage residents to walk or cycle to neighbourhood amenities such as local shops, parks, schools and public transport.
The proposed bikeway alignment is shown over the page.
Council has commenced preliminary design for the bikeway, with planning in consultation with the Queensland Government.
Originally, construction was scheduled to start in 2011, however due to flood recovery work this project is now anticipated to start in 2012.

About the project

The proposed Oxley Creek bikeway stage two will deliver

  • a shared pathway from Nosworthy Park, Corinda to Brisbane Markets
  • a new shared bridge across Oxley Creek from Nosworthy Park to Oxley Creek Common natural wetlands
  • approximately 650 metres of shared pathway on Sherwood Road
  • bicycle awareness zones on the western side of the creek to connect to new pathway to Corinda Rail Station and Corinda High School
  • a link to Oxley Creek bikeway stage one which will connect Strickland Terrace bikeway to the existing Oxley Creek bridge on Sherwood Road (this future project is in planning stages).


Preferred bridge location - Nosworthy Park

Nosworthy Park has been identified as the preferred location for the proposed bridge across Oxley Creek.  
Council initially investigated building the bridge at the end of Kennard Street.  However this bridge would cause greater environmental impacts.  Placing the bridge at Nosworthy Park provides a more direct route to Corinda Rail Station and Corinda High School.
Council will make every effort to minimise any environmental impacts and will undertake replanting in the local area.

Sherwood Road - future upgrades

As part of Council's Sherwood Bus Depot development, traffic lights and signalised pedestrian crossings will be installed on Sherwood Road at the entrance to the depot.
Footpath upgrades along Sherwood Road between Oxley Creek bridge and the new signalised intersection at the bus depot are currently being investigated for future construction.

Have Your Say

Council is interested in community feedback on the proposed route of the Oxley Creek bikeway stage two.  To provide feedback or find out more about this project you can:
Phone : 1800 550 712
Email :
Mail : Oxley Creek Bikeway Stage Two, Brisbane City Council, GPO Box 1434, Brisbane QLD 4001
View a larger copy of the project plan at the Corinda Library
You can provide your feedback about the proposed bikeway until 30 November 2011.

Last seen: 6 years 8 months ago
Joined: 24/05/2010 - 1:34pm
New Trafic Lights

I read the above bikeway flyer with interest but that interest turned to concern when I read the statement "new signalised intersection at the bus depot are currently being investigated for future consideration".  Can anyone please advise if the plans for these lights were disclosed - or even proposed - in the initial plan for the bus depot as I no longer have that paperwork.  If it does eventuate, I can forsee disruptions to the traffic flow along a major arterial road as we end up with the situation of 3 sets of traffic lights within the space of about 300 meters.  

Last seen: 2 weeks 4 days ago
Joined: 10/07/2009 - 10:49pm
Traffic Lights were planned

Yes, traffic lights were planned as part of the original proposal - it was recognised early on that there was a safety issue in getting buses out of the Sherwood Bus Depot and so this was always part of the plan.  Of course residents protested at the time that the blind crest of the railway bridge would cause follow-on safety concerns, so we can only hope that BCC do the right thing and design the solution correctly to minimise accidents for those travelling east.

Last seen: 6 years 9 months ago
Joined: 02/06/2010 - 9:11am
More on the proposed Nosworthy Park Walkway and Bicycle Bridge -

This morning (October 17th) we got a flyer inviting comments on the proposed bikeway. The letter to Nicole Johnston of 14 October says the council will offer actual meetings with groups of stakeholders. This is not mentioned in today's flyer. They are going against their promise yet again
Margaret Maynard

Last seen: 6 years 9 months ago
Joined: 02/06/2010 - 9:11am
Proposed Nosworthy Park Bikeway

 In response to the email below, sent to the council as part of their invitation for feedback on their recent flyer, I got a call from a council person seeking to make contact with me and I imagine trying to ameliorate my concerns. When I asked why the Nosworthy bikeway proposal had not been included in consultations regarding the Neighborhood plan I was told this was an entirely separate issue and subject to different procedures. She said she had received a number of comments already, many positive and regularly looked at the WT group's website. I told her that some residents had not received the flyer and she said that the council could not be expected to contact everyone. It was a lengthy call during which I suggested that any change of this nature should be subject to public consultation with the stakeholders. Finally she asked me what I wanted and I said that it would be nice to call a public meeting. She replied that it was unlikely many people would attend and did I realize how much these meetings cost. I found this interesting given the amount already paid for the bridge plan. As I understood it, they have no plans to have any such meeting. Margaret Maynard
Dear Sir - You have invited comment on this proposed bikeway in a recent
flyer. The Council promised as far back as 2010 that public consultation
would be organized with residents and other stakeholders. I am asking you to
keep to your word and call such a public meeting to hear what the ratepayers
have to say. This project has reached an advanced stage with no consultation
at all, as far as I can tell. This is extremely disappointing and is
repeating a practice that occurred previously in regard to other
neighborhood projects. Regards Margaret
Margaret Maynard

Daniel Benz
Last seen: 6 years 8 months ago
Joined: 23/08/2009 - 8:59pm
Public Mtg 16/11 Nosworthy park bridge/bikeway

Hi, notifiying all of a public meeting being held by Friends of Oxley Common in conjunction with BCC re Nosworthy Park/oxley Common bikeway and bridge.  As per below rec'd from FOOC.  Pls pass on to all concerned so that BCC hear the msg loud and clear.
From: Friends of Oxley Creek Common [
Sent: Thursday, 27 October 2011 5:02 PM
Subject: Diary date Wed 16th November, PUBLIC MEETING

PUBLIC MEETING Wednesday 16th November 2011
Corinda Bowls Club, Hall Av, Corinda 7 - 9 pm
Details will be circulated but please mark this date in your diaries.
BCC are invited to present their proposal for a bike track from Corinda SHS and Corinda station through Nosworthy Park 
and across Oxley Creek Common to the Markets. Is this the best route? Are there options?
Come along to hear more about this proposal and to express your views.
We stress we are in favour of a pedestrian & bicycle bridge across Oxley Creek and bicycle access on the Common. As we have been told feedback 
to BCC closes on 30th November, we’d like this chance to discuss this proposal in public, as the aerial photograph and blue line show little detail.
This “plan” may be viewed on the websites of BCC and on 
Faseny McPhee, President


Friends of Oxley Creek Common Inc.,

PO Box 319, Sherwood 4075,
Queensland, Australia.  

Daniel Benz
Last seen: 6 years 8 months ago
Joined: 23/08/2009 - 8:59pm
Public Mtg 16/11 Nosworthy park bridge/bikeway

Hi again, I emailed Tennyson Ward Office re 16/11 mtg to inform Nicole Johnston in case she was not aware of it.

Marie Hollingworth
Last seen: 7 years 6 months ago
Joined: 21/10/2011 - 11:37pm
My list of questions to Lord Mayor on bikeway

 8 November 2011
Questions for the Bikeway Team re the Oxley Creek Bikeway
(my apologies that there are so many)
Which of the options available could reasonably be expected to be of convenience for the greater number of citizens –ie is upgrading Sherwood Road or locating the bridge at Kennard, Martindale Streets or Nosworthy Park the best option?

Sherwood Road

  • Have the many requests from community and cyclists in particular to upgrade bridges on Sherwood Road had any consideration?
  • When will a plan for an upgrade to this road be released?
  • Why is safety of pedestrians and cyslists on Sherwood Road complacently neglected by refusal to upgrade or create a safe place to cross when access to/from the BCC Bus Depot has not presented any problem?
  • Why has an upgrade to Sherwood Road been supplanted by the Oxley Creek bikeway Stage 2 ?


Oxley Creek Common

  • What changes to the existing cement path around the Ecocentre at the Common are proposed? What vegetation removal will this entail?
  • Removal of vegetation :– 1 on creek side of track – what processes will be done to protect from de-stabilisation of bank and injuring of habitat values,  2 on paddock side – vegetation removable would be unaceptable as plantings occurred through grants, corporate plantings and hundreds of volunteer hours = contemptuous of community efforts
  • Shared pathway with commuting cyclists wanting to travel at 30-40km/hr on the 3m cement track would mean anxiety and harassment for birdwatchers, dawdlers, dog- walkers who go there for the peace and ambience of the surroundings
  • Will path be of use to commuter cyclists or is it too out of the way, winding and steep?
  • Will cyclists be travelling at 30-40km/hr on this shared pathway?
  • Hasn’t experience elsewhere shown that shared pathways of this nature are not successful? Why then is this proposed in this much loved and valued location?
  • Is the ‘Bikeway Team’ aware of the significant numbers of different bird species that have been recorded over 6 or more years at Oxley Creek Common – many of which use the area to be cemented for the bikeway as habitat?
  • Has the effect of such traffic at increased speed on this wildlife been considered?
  • Is it planned to provide lighting? Overhead lights/catseyes/other?
  • Experience elsewhere has shown that lighting has a deleterious effect on diurnal rhythms of wildlife. What plans are there here to minimize any negative effects?
  • How is evening/night-time safety to be managed in such an – until now- unused area at such times? Safety usually requires presence of many others on the track and overlooking it – this does not apply on Oxley Creek Common.
  • Currently a gate is in place at the start of the track. It defaults to a closed position. What plans are there for this?
  • Difference in height of the east and west creek banks. This is considerable at Nosworthy Park location and quite small at Kennard Street. How will the bridge be constructed to allow for this? Will the bridge be sloped down to Nosworthy Park? What will the approach(es) be to the bridge on the east bank to reduce this height difference? How much vegetation removal will this require? Is this acceptable?


Nosworthy Park

  • The cemented 3m wide cycle path will pass along about 100m of creek bank (riparian zone). How close to the edge will it be? How will the bank be stabilised against erosion occurring when there is a flood?
  • What plans are there to overcome the disruption to the ecological value (preservation of creek bank, habitat for stream invertebrates and land dwelling animals, trees, roots and mid-story vegetation) of the riparian zone and its beneficial contribution to water health and quality when a cement path transects this transitional role?
  • In previous recent floods, 2011, 2009, 1996 the riparian zone experienced considerable current flow moving mulch and debris along to be piled up at obstacles. Can you ensure that the existence of an open hard-surfaced path like this will not contribute to greater velocity of flow and hence more damage to areas adjacent to the path and further to the north in the direction of the current? These areas have not yet recovered the vegetation cover that was there before the 2011 flood when there was considerable current.
  • Clearing of this riparian zone at Nosworthy Park similarly occurred because of a Commonwealth Water Grant applied for in 2006 by the bushcare group and which enabled clearing of both the slope of weedy vines and trees and creek bank of Celtis or Chinese Elm, invasive vines -Madeira vine, Ipomoea and Glycine and other weeds and non-native grasses. It is again contemptuous of this volunteer contribution to capitalise on the effort put into clearing this creek bank in comparison with the clearing that would be needed at other sites under consideration – Kennard or Martindale streets.
  • Maintenance since has been by volunteer time and labour to enable the creek bank to be enjoyed as a quiet, contemplative through walk by the community – many of whom did not even know that the creek was there before the clearing occurred.
  • How will the gradient of the slope safely enable those of variable abilities to use it? How many skinned knees will scooter and trike riders have? Will it be safe and manageable for wheelchair users?
  • Will commuter cyclists use this slow, steep and indirect route?
  • What community survey was done to assess who needed 3m cement cycle paths in this area and to these locations - Railway station, High School?
  • Were residents of Erinvale Street whose homes will be affected by the 3m cycle path close to their back fence consulted before this plan was devised?
  • These residents have concerns about privacy, lighting, safety plus loss of the use of this area of the park for the current recreational purposes of local children. What allowance has been made in this plan for the social issues that will affect these and other residents?
  • Large areas of cement are notoriously glary in our harsh summer sun. Planting tall shady trees may not be the most desired solution in this situation. What proposals to overcome this can be offered to these residents?
  • The area immediately behind the Corinda Bowls club has been used by community groups for functions, particularly a Twilight Concert in conjunction with the Peaks to Points Festival. Because of the location looking through the trees at distant lights it has a special ambience which should not be lost. It would not be improved by a large swathe of cement path through the midst of the area. The path should not pass through the centre of this area.
  • What community survey was done to take note of how the area where the NE corner of the Corinda Bowls Club intersects with Nosworthy Park is used?
  • How will commuter cyclists, children running to the toilet, toddlers using the adjoining playground, dog walkers, basketball court users etc share this area safely?
  • The existing cycle path already cuts across areas used for family games, cricket, football, dog walkers etc. Currently users have been recreational not commuters. Many large family groups of mixed ages are using the park. Children chasing balls notoriously do not look out for traffic. How will safety for recreational users and commuter cyclists be managed?

Because of the many concerns I have expressed about the Bikeway extension through two valuable park areas I believe that it is not environmentally sound to build a bridge across to Nosworthy Park.
The benefits of a bridge at Kennard Street offsetting the longer bridge that would be required are:

  • Minimal extra concreting of Oxley Creek Common track and habitat disturbance compared with hundreds of metres through a pleasant tranquil walk
  • Only a small height differential between banks compared with at Nosworthy Park
  • A small area of riparian zone to be cleared compared with hundreds of metres along Nosworthy’s riparian zone and then up a steep slope which would affect privacy of homes
  • Less bikeway to be covered with mud and debris in a flood
  • Direct roadway connecting bridge with Oxley Road to both north and south which would be a more direct route to Station and High School.
  • More attractive to commuter cyclists
  • Fewer cars on Railway Terrace than Nelson Street which has station parking on both sides.
  • Would avoid the steep winding route up from the Nosworthy park bridge
  • Would not divide an area used for functions behind the Bowls club
  • Would not create safety issues in a congested corner of Nosworthy Park near amenities and children’s playground
  • Would not introduce safety issues with shared commuter cyclng and recreational usage in Nosworthy Park.

As I hope I have made clear, my concern is that the right place be chosen to build this bridge but it must be where it is of most use to the community and without undue environmental and habitat disturbance. Recreational areas will become of even more importance with the population increase destined for this quiet leafy valued area.
Of equal importance to me is that the trust of the community be gained by Council by providing a transparent process of consultation which enables the community to have the opportunity to influence decisions by informing about the best and most sustainable outcome for their needs.
Many thanks
Yours faithfully
Marie Hollingworth

Faseny McPhee
Last seen: 7 years 6 months ago
Joined: 10/11/2011 - 9:49am
BCC briefing and Press Notified

The Satellite newspaper came to Nosworthy and were given an outline. We'll see what it is makes it into, in next week's paper just before the public meeting on 16th at Corinda Bowls Club, 7pm.
The Bikeways folk will consult with OCCA another day. But they did come to Nosworthy Wednesday, after visiting houses in Erinvale st that will have the 3m wide bikeway just outside their back fences. Adrian Ford, project manager, came, and Stephanie Edwards from Bikeways BCC, and Ruth, consultation manager who answers the phone when you ring in about the bikeway.
I felt they were very much all doing a job, design / manage this then move on to another place. They had few facts at their fingertips, had problems following where their blue line in the photo represented on the ground. Let alone where the bridge actually would go.
BCC eyes maps, they said, spies green and preferably flat areas, hopefully owned by BCC then tries to join them up with combined bike/walking tracks. As one of us said, "but some people like these areas kept quiet" which went right over their heads.
Sherwood Rd they ignored, "too hard basket". One day the whole road will be upgraded, with footpaths and bikeways, but not tomorrow.
My first main objection is the proposed entrance off Hall Av into Nosworthy Park. It is where the present service-vehicular gate is, near Donaldson St, which will be sealed strongly for both vehicles and bikes. That is to the North of the present walking track, almost bisecting the park with a 3m concrete path + cyclists etc, eliminating even more flat "ball-games" areas. There are no other flat parks in the area until one reaches Dunlop Park. Track then does a loop BETWEEN the basketball court and the toilets - don't step backwards, anybody! Don't worry, they will put signs to warn cyclists and small children playing to look out for each other! I objected strongly to the park being filled with signs/instructions.
They couldn't say exactly where the track would make that big bend around to a bridge site. The Park did look pleasant in the late afternoon light and it will be such an eyesore to have a 3m concrete track dominating it. But that is what some people want. They will probably do some earthworks to make slopes 'easier' but didn't know what gradients will be. Wheelchairs and prams or walking frames are not being considered, just bikes.
Tracks everywhere will be 3m concrete then 0.5m each side clear then a certain width of low plants allowed, e.g. grasses, lomandra. No branches sticking out that may hit cyclists in the face, body. Tall trees overhead allowed but they have to start out as saplings, don't they? Then subsequent planting near the track will all have to fit "safety" standards, no room for prowlers. Any vegetation removed, and some will be along the present walking track on the Common side and Nosworthy, will be carbon offset, they promised.
Lots of questions were asked about the actual bridge site and approaches, which they couldn't answer/didn't seem to know. We told them the riparian zone was environmentally ultra-important, (including trapping 2049 containers, yes, 2049, in the january floods, that otherwise would have been carried out further to other areas!). We stressed regular flooding.
We stressed cyclist/pedestrian interactions and safety but they shrugged that off as something people will have to get used to. Around the Environment Centre on the Common will be even more chaotic with interactions but again, they will put signs. The elderly on walking frames, and some seniors groups are regularly being brought here for picnics, and picnickers and festival crowds and cyclists just had better learn quickly to look out all the time. FOOCC will meet Bikeways folk on the Common and show them as much as we can think of.
The bridge, wherever it is, will be high enough to allow canoists to pass under at high tide. Bridge will be designed to last 100 years - unless a flood comes and containers hit it!
I stressed several times the necessity of BCC coming to the meeting on 16th Nov 7pm at Corinda Bowls Club, to present their case, so we hope they will present to the public what current proposals are.
They want to meet with all the people putting in feedback. Please consider sending in all your comments ASAP, even one at a time as you think of them. I'm starting again with this entrance into Nosworthy park being in a central dominating position, giving cyclists priority over anyone wanting to play cricket or football there, as our and all the local kids did, and still do. My personal preference is for a bridge at Kennard Street.
Lighting - A solar-powered overhead light likely will be situated at each end of the bridge then apart from that cat's eyes in-ground solar LEDs will outline the path, visible only along the path we were told. Cyclists provide their own bike-light and everyone goes at their own risk.
We emphasised the vast number of bird species and the disturbance of faster bicyles, bells ringing, shouting, extra litter but while Ruth wrote pages of notes, how much effect will our comments have? We talked regularly of Kennard st being our personally preferred site but they weren't interested. A bridge there would be, say, 60m long whereas at Nosworthy it may be only 50m long. $$$$. Numerous environmental concerns were tactfully brought up but they seemed more interested in building concrete tracks so that people can get out on bikes or walking. They seemed to think the "lycra brigade" won't risk their expensive bikes on a park bikeway but stay on good quality sealed roads.
They know nothing of the long term plans for the Common, still state-owned, and weren't interested in our suggestions that a bikeway could be integrated into whatever is planned for that community-zoned resource.
Anyway, they will meet with OCCA one day, with FOOCC another, and with any people writing/phoning in. Local knowledge is so different to project staff out from a central office, who won't even be around to use the end product. That is my main emphasis, to write in with whatever your views are, to give feedback from the community.
Official comment: "Remember that if you ask for a change to the existing plan they will count that as support for their proposal. You do need to be clear about an alternative if you believe there should be one."  Faseny

Nicole Johnston
Last seen: 8 years 3 months ago
Joined: 19/08/2009 - 8:48pm
Cr Nicole Johnston moves motion for Council Officers to attend

Hi All,

Please find attached a copy of the motion that I will be moving at Council on Tuesday regarding the Oxley Creek Bikeway project.


Nicole Johnston
Councillor for Tennyson Ward

Notice of Motion

For Council meeting to be held on 15 November 2011

I move that: this Council resolve to send Brisbane City Council Oxley Creek Bikeway Officers to attend a community meeting for Corinda residents on Wednesday 16 November 2011 to provide information and answer questions about the proposed Oxley Creek Bridge and Bikeway as requested by the residents.
Moved, Nicole Johnston, Councillor for Tennyson Ward
10 November 2011
Seconded, Helen Abrahams, Councillor for The Gabba Ward
10 November 2011

Nicole Johnston
Last seen: 8 years 3 months ago
Joined: 19/08/2009 - 8:48pm
Oxley Creek Bikeway Update - Message from Cr Nicole Johnston

My apologies that I cannot be with you this evening. I am presenting awards tonight to the graduating class of Yeronga State High School at their annual speech night.
Over the past few weeks, numerous residents have spoken to me about two major concerns to do with the bikeway proposal. Firstly, a lack of proper interactive consultation by Council on options for the bikeway. Secondly, the impact of the preferred location at Nosworthy Park.
My main concern is to ensure that as local residents you have your say about the preferred location.
I have asked a number of questions on notice seeking answers to residents’ legitimate questions and have moved a motion in Council calling for proper consultation with residents about the preferred bikeway location. Last night in Council, this motion was voted down by LNP Councillors who stated the current consultation is adequate.
While there are numerous views about the bikeway, most residents have indicated to me that they support the bridge connection from Kennard St across to the Oxley Common. Nosworthy Park has been selected by Council without community consultation and because it is slightly cheaper to build than the Kennard St option.
In fact, Brisbane City Council has examined three possible options: Kennard St, Martindale St and Nosworthy Park. However, only one has been put to the community.
I am supportive of a bikeway that provides better connectivity for local residents, but it must be in the right location, one that provides recreational benefits to residents without adversely affecting our local environment. Certainly Kennard St seems a more sensible option as it would benefit both Sherwood and Corinda residents, connect more directly to the Corinda shops and community facilities on the Oxley Common.
For the past four years as your local Councillor I have also been lobbying for construction of a dedicated shared pathway between the Sherwood shops and Rocklea Markets along Sherwood Rd. Each year this recommendation has been made in my budget submission to Council but has been rejected by the Lord Mayor each time. It remains one of the most sought after pedestrian/cyclist safety improvements that local residents support in the area. I will continue to lobby for this important safety improvement.
How to make a Submission - Comments must be provided by 30 November 2011
View the plans online at .
Phone - 1800 550 712
Email - or you can post to
Post - Oxley Creek Bikeway Stage Two; Brisbane City Council, GPO Box 1434, Brisbane QLD 4001
If you need any further information please call my office on 3403 8605.
Kind regards
Nicole Johnston
Councillor for Tennyson

John Simmons
Last seen: 7 years 6 months ago
Joined: 18/11/2011 - 2:02pm
Community Meeting 16/11/2011 Regarding Biekway Bridge

As a proponent for some years of improved bikeway access to Oxley Creek Common and a former resident of Erinvale St I attended the public meeting out of interest and also concern that BCC engineering advice to date as recounted to members of the public was well below the standard expected of competent engineering. 
Based on the presentations and discussion at that meeting, taking into account my experience and qualifications as a civil and geotechnical engineer, taking into account my experience as a member of the Nosworthy Park Bushcare Group, and my cyclist's knowledge of the local area, I am appalled by the lack of due process in the BCC "consultation" to date and I am concerned that the proposed Nosworthy Park bridge site CANNOT deliver the facility for commuter cyclists that the BCC claims. 
Objections raised by BCC regarding the Kennard St site and the Martindale St site appear to be both baseless and misleading.  If the BCC intends to spend public money wisely in delivering a solution that will achieve what the BCC and Lord Mayor claim, then serious consideration should be given to objective bikeway planning criteria (which exist and are widdely used) and sources of supplementary funding (which are likely to exist via enquiry to Qld Transport).  Those bikeway planning criteria involve consideration of the usage profile including data on the users' trip source/destination/time-of-day data. 
In addition, there are technical matters of alignment, gradients, foundations, slope stability, and earthworks practicality that need to be costed for all candidate sites before a rational decision can be made regarding preferred site. 
Based on what I heard at the communuity meeting, I believe that the best solution at the current level of usage data is to SERIOUSLY upgrade the Clara st bikeway corridor under the railway line and via Jerrold St to Sherwood Rd, thence along purpose-built facilities along SHERWOOD ROAD and thence across Oxley Creek. 
This will be very expensive as it involves serious upgrades to Sherwood Rod bridges and traffic separation for various facilities along the Sherwood Road corridor. 
The Kennard St or Martindale St alternatives are more modest but create in my view unacceptable conflicts with pedestrian and recreational use of Oxley Creek Common. 
The Nosworthy Park alternative is a distant last because of the significant approach construction works and poor geometric standards including large-scale fill construction over a slope which has a history of water springs and slope instability during the January 2011 floods. 
The Nosworthy Park alternative, as communicated by BCC officers to date, is incidentally also no better than a Lord Mayor's kick in the guts to the volunteers who have freely done so much for BCC to improve the park's amenity and environmental significance.

Last seen: 7 years 6 months ago
Joined: 01/08/2010 - 7:42am
I have raised issues with Lord Mayor

I have raised with Lord Mayor, through Nicole, similar issues to those raised by John. Put simply, I think the investment option made already by Council is a poor decision and I would prefer to see the funding spent on much better value to the community. As a cyclist, I can't see how the path is going to be heavily used. It will be a high cost path servicing only a small minority who will ride to the markets. It will not encourage regular commuters to ride which is what Council and State Govt should be doing.  
There is a huge investment currently being spent on the Bus Depot and on the upgrade of Clewley and Oxley St intersection. Yet there seems to be no intergration or communication between the project teams and the proposed bike path.
When I emailed the project team, I was told they could reply by email but would take over a week to have the email cleared through Council so they preferred to just discuss the issues.
I have received a reply from the Lord Mayor, a two line letter, simply thanking me for raising the issues. No considered response, nor any commitment to do anything. Just a simply appreciation for raising issues.
It is clear Council are going through the mechanics of "consultation" and are set to deliver on a very poor investment decision. 

Last seen: 2 weeks 4 days ago
Joined: 10/07/2009 - 10:49pm
Community Analysis of Bikeway alternatives


Comparison of possible cycling routes between Corinda and Oxley Common1
Sherwood Rd separated cycle path
Kennard St
Nosworthy Park
CPTED3(crime prevention through environmental design)
Good sight lines
High visibility
At grade surveillance
Minimal entrapment spots
Lighting already provided
Good sight lines
High visibility
At grade surveillance
Minimal entrapment spots
Lighting consistent with existing road right of way
Poor sightlines
Blind corners
High grade
Several entrapment spots
Lighting would interfere with park ambience/amenity
Medium sightlines
At grade
Few entrapment spots
Lighting would interfere with park ambience but close to lit road
Suitability for bicycle riders
Least distance; at grade; continuous speed; visibility; minimal conflicting use; connects to road network
Next least distance; medium gradient; continuous speed; visibility; minimal conflicting use;
connects directly to road network on Corinda side of creek
Further distance; high gradient; variable speed; poor visibility; high conflicting use with park users; poor connection with road network
Furthest distance; low gradient; continuous speed; visibility;
high conflicting use with park users; connects to road network
Conflicting uses
Adequate shoulders; good connection to local streets
Adequate shoulders; good connection to local streets
Social use of park; hard pathway into park used for recreation; used by children, disabled, dogs; speed/braking on hill; poor shoulders; greater probability of loose material and high maintenance from trees;
Positive feature = access to toilets and park benches
Social use of park; hard pathway into park used for recreation; poor shoulders; probability of loose material and high maintenance from trees
No curves
No curves
Requires greater radius of curvature; poor stopping distance
Access to surrounding area and network
Easiest access for those living both north and south of Sherwood Rd; access to Sherwood train line; close to entrance to Oxley Common
Good access for those living both north and south of Sherwood Rd; access to Corinda train station; close to entrance to Oxley Common
Further distance from entrance to Oxley Common; access to Corinda train station; more complex access from Sherwood Rd
Furthest distance from entrance to Oxley Common; poor access to train line and networks
Engineering design
Could be incorporated in present redevelopment
Good bridge approach and work space for construction; approaches on both sides simple
Less distance for bridge; considerable path construction; geometry for the approach more complicated
Less distance for bridge; considerable path construction
Minimal if in conjunction with new road design
Easily accessible for construction from Kennard St
Difficult access for construction on both sides; longer bicycle path construction; path subject to erosion
Needs assessment
Environmental impact
Small amount: revegetated on Commons side; existing road alignment and road base on Corinda side; some mangroves; weed trees
Substantial: revegetated on both sides; requires removal of vegetation and high maintenance to provide sufficient path and width at Bushcare regeneration site; weed trees already removed; some mangroves
Revegetated on Corinda side by Bushcare group
Stakeholders’ views
  • Cyclists
  • Local residents
  • Pedestrians
  • Disabled persons
  • Motor vehicles
Best for bicycling commuters and local residents; least conflict with motorists; indirect access to the Common for wheelchair users.
No stakeholder conflict
Good for commuting cyclists and local residents; Some conflict with motorists; amenable to traffic controls; direct access to the Common for wheelchair users.
Minimal stakeholder conflict
Gradient and distance not good for commuting cyclists; difficult wheelchair access, esp. self-propelled, due to excessive gradients; greater potential conflict with motorists; unpopular with residents and park users due to impact on park use and on bushcare site.
High stakeholder conflict
Distance not good for bicycling commuters; access to Common for wheelchairs is distant; High potential conflict with motorists.
Unknown stakeholder conflict
1 This table has been produced to contribute to an informed discussion about potential bicycle routes based on objective criteria and local knowledge of the area. Accurate data about distances, gradients, and land tenureet cand community input is needed to complete the assessment.
2 Criteria are derived from: QT, n.d., Developing a local cycle strategy and network plan; Ker et al 2006 Pedestrian-Cyclist Conflict Minimisation on Shared Paths and Footpaths, Austroads Report, April 2006; Australian Bicycle Council and Australian Greenhouse Office, n.d., Bikeability Toolkit Route based Checklist; Vic Roads, 1999, Cycle Notes - Shared Bicycle/Pedestrian Path Design
3 Brisbane City Council Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) Planning Scheme Policy


Faseny McPhee
Last seen: 7 years 6 months ago
Joined: 10/11/2011 - 9:49am
Cr Julian Simmonds bans public release of bikeway option costing

Dear Lord Mayor,
Oxley Creek Bikeway Stage 2, Total Costs Comparison?
I sent in a list of twenty four questions about the proposed Oxley Creek Bikeway Stage 2. Your Bikeway Team has answered orally most of these questions.
One outstanding question is what is the difference in total cost between

  • A. the bikeway and a Kennard Street Bridge and
  • B. a Nosworthy Park Bridge and extended bikeway with associated lighting.

This answer is important as in answer to the question why was the Kennard Street option rejected, glib answers about Kennard Street being more expensive were supplied. No figures were supplied and Adrian Ford, Project Manager, said he was unable to supply them, that others would have to give them to him to pass on to us.
As over two weeks have elapsed since we were told figures would be supplied to us, yet none have, we can only assume that no figures exist, or do not support the change of preferred option from Kennard Street to Nosworthy Park.
Ratepayers and the public are being told by the Bikeway Team the Kennard Street Option has been rejected outright by BCC because it is much more expensive than the total Nosworthy Park route, yet no figures have been produced to substantiate this claim. Even the Project Manager had difficulty in conjuring up a number when we asked for a very approximate estimate of the Nosworthy Park Option cost.
If these figures exist, I expect them to be supplied to me and to the public today. As closing date for comments is 30th November, we need time to comment on cost comparisons, and how it is proposed to spend our ratepayers' dollars.
Many of the public are extremely disappointed with the manner, disdain, in which we are being treated, and the complete lack of open and informative consultation with the ratepayers.
POSTSCRIPT: Your Bikeway Team has just phoned returning my calls to their answering machine, informing me that Cr Julian Simmonds has given direct instructions that no figures relating to this project may be released. This response simply confirms my conclusion that either no figures exist or the Kennard Street Option is the more economical, and BCC are not willing to admit they may have another agenda .
In view of this, I am asking you to provide justification to the ratepayers that there has actually been an informed decision-making process regarding the preferred option for the bridge. As no community consultation was held, please also justify in terms of the comparative costs that the money allocated to the Oxley Creek Bikeway Stage 2 is being wisely spent as the opinion at the meeting held on 16th November 2011 was that the Nosworthy Park option did not meet the needs of the community, least of all cyclists.
Yours truly,
Faseny McPhee

Rob Hollingworth
Last seen: 7 years 5 months ago
Joined: 27/11/2011 - 7:47pm
My letter to Lord Mayor and Bikeway project team

EMAIL to: To Bikeways Team
I write in response to the proposal to build a bikeway and bridge through Nosworthy Park and Oxley Creek Common. I have lived in Corinda for 25 years. I am inaugural member of Nosworthy Park Bush Care Group, which was responsible for the park precinct winning the previous Lord Mayor’s first spotless suburb award.
I am in favour of a bikeway to bypass the rail overpass bridge on Sherwood Road, but am at odds with the decision to run it through open parkland and bushland areas which have been regenerated from nothing through countless hours by volunteers.
3 factors influencing this decision come to mind: Money, Biodiversity and Amenity.
A fourth, perhaps the prevailing factor, could be the push to add kilometres to a regional bikeway network.
Method: Bikeway team is seeking community feedback offering only one option.
Bike team consultation process:

  • Offered no choice and declined to attend a properly convened and behaved public information meeting.
  • Kennard Street was vetoed as an option, despite appearing the best choice of Martindale, Nosworthy and Kennard. No wonder our local councillor is crying “foul”. Can I suggest the best thing for all concerned is for the process to be revisited in full, with fair contact with the local community?
  • Despite promises for feedback on comparative costings, environmental assessments, and poor access for users, no answer has been received. These questions from community members were relevant and aimed at achieving the best solution.

On comparative costings,

  • I defy anyone in your team to demonstrate the few metres of bikeway to a bridge at Kennard Street are more expensive than hundreds of metres through a steep gradient at Nosworthy Park, despite an apparent shorter bridge span.  Kennard has the added advantage of doing less damage to the bushland riparian banks along Oxley Creek Common.
  • Martindale Street was priced out because of supposed land resumption cost. What resumption? The street goes almost to the creek.
  • If Pradella have a commitment to provide land for a path which takes a bikeway right to Oxley Creek bridge on Sherwood Road, why not wait for that to eventuate and save $4m.  The advantage there is it will serve more users (Sherwood and Graceville) as well. The farther south a bridge is placed from Sherwood Road, the less it will be used.

The non attendance of the Bikeway team at our public meeting on 16 November which had an attendance of over 75 community members, meant they missed out on valuable expertise and local information which may have helped the team to a more objective recommendation.
It is a shame your process precludes taking notice of people who are directly affected by your apparently unilateral decisions.
Nosworthy Park gradients would require introduction of large amounts of fill. How will you have authority to build up a river bed/ flood plain which clearly is subject to flooding?
In summary, based on money, Pradella would be cheapest, without needing a bridge. Why not wait? Kennard or Martindale would be next. Nosworthy would be the most expensive with long, difficult concrete paths.
With housing around all options, any flooding effect would be similar for each. If BCC is worried about flooding around Kennard, why did it raise the bus depot footprint by some 3 metres, forming a dam wall down stream from existing dwellings?
Based on biodiversity, Oxley Creek Common will be damaged most from the Nosworthy location. Little value seems to have been placed on the volunteer hours spent there and at Nosworthy Park.
Nosworthy Park is set to have a second concrete scar across the children’s’ ball playing area, just to conform to a separation between cars and bikes. But, is it OK to have bikes travel through young children at play? The bends and gradient offer unacceptable safety hazards.
This location will not attract Corinda High School use and is removed from busier communities at Sherwood and Graceville.
Regional Bikeway: Commuters will not use the Nosworthy bridge because the path will be too steep and indirect. It seems the bridge is to be part of a regional bike way program, to the detriment of existing community amenities, biodiversity, and a reasonable budget.
I appreciate the work the team must have put into this project, but in trying to meet too many criteria, any benefit is more than offset by other community costs.
Without an open mind to receive community input, surely it carries the risk of only partial success at best?
Other minor elements:

  • Move the pathway at Oxley Creek Common to the paddocks' fencing alignment.
  • NP is a SMALL park! Has there been no account of the “Costs” to community for loss of amenity?

This issue will not go away. I urge a re-consideration in the best interests of all concerned.
Please commence a genuine dialogue with the community for a better all round result. I seek dialogue on the matters raised.
Yours sincerely,
Robert Hollingworth

Marie Hollingworth
Last seen: 7 years 6 months ago
Joined: 21/10/2011 - 11:37pm
My feedback to Bike project Team

Submission re Oxley Creek Bikeway Stage II Preliminary Plan requesting reconsideration of this plan because a range of better options exist which would enable the goal of bikeway construction in this area to be achieved.


I am writing further to my earlier letters of 8th and 14th November - which set out in detail the many aspects of this seemingly arbitrarily drawn ‘preliminary plan’ that I consider to be undesirable and unnecessarily destructive to the environment and future use - to request that this plan be reconsidered. Because there are many factors about this plan which would appear to be undecided, unknown or not adequately thought through it makes no sense to squander millions of dollars constructing this bikeway if it is neither necessary nor wanted.


I factors I refer to which are currently unknown (to the community) are:

  • Currently the Queensland Government owns Oxley Creek Common.
  • Future plans for Oxley Creek Common. I understand that last week the intention to effect the long awaited hand-over from State Government to Brisbane City Council in mid 2012 was announced.
  • Brisbane City Council’s proposed future plan for Oxley Creek Common – does one exist? Who will be consulted about this?
  • Timing and anticipated cost of an upgrade to Sherwood Road which is the main source of the problem. This would relegate the Oxley Creek Bikeway Stage II to an expensive (economically and environmentally) unnecessary mistake or at best a temporary ‘band-aid’ solution.
  • Consideration of the apparently recent publication of a plan to extend the bikeway from Strickland Terrace through the Praedella development to access Sherwood Road without building a bridge. No details have been made available for scrutiny as yet.
  • No consultation with cyclist groups to assess whether such a lengthy out of the way route would be used.


Discriminatory aspects of the plan are:

  • Non-compliance with construction access requirements for those who use wheelchairs. The gradient of the inclined pathway from the bridge in Nosworthy Park will be impossible for those of varied abilities – including small children and the elderly– to use at all. This will further reduce the use of Bikeway Stage II.
  • The consultation process followed by the BCC in line with current day trends focuses only on the process by which consultation is carried out, ensuring the procedure is carried out to the letter, ie that all the boxes for consultation are ticked. This effectively discriminates against the views expressed by the community, as although consultation is held, ‘lip-service’ only is paid to the views expressed which thus struggle to have significant influence on outcomes in this process..


Alternatives to this ‘preliminary plan’ do exist and would achieve the aim of creating a useable connected bikeway and walking system in all directions. These alternatives are:

  • Giving consideration to providing connectivity of access to/from the proposed Oxley Creek bikeway to both north and south.
  • Developing a plan to connect with the existing bikeway through suburbs north of Sherwood Road (via Strickland Terrace Bikeway +/- Praedella land?)
  • Construction of a bridge could be avoided by using the existing railway cycle underpass from Clara to Jerrold Streets to feed commuter cyclists to Sherwood Road or to link with a ‘northern’ cycle path using a crossing to be established on Sherwood Road.
  • Using Clara Street as a direct commuter route instead of constructing both a lengthy and out of the way cement path through Oxley Creek Common and a bridge with steep, circuitous path through busy areas of Nosworthy Park. Similar roadways have been used in this way (with cycle stencils) on multiple roads throughout Brisbane.
  • Such a route would have connectivity to Oxley via Pratten Street, Cliveden Avenue and Oxley Road and enable a direct extension of the bikeway system to more southern suburbs eg to link up with Blunder Road.
  • Catering for pedestrians walking to the markets could be achieved by putting a bikepath around the Bus Depot to bypass the Railway bridge and upgrading footpaths on the bridge over Oxley Creek.
  • Walking distance to access markets or Oxley Creek Common will not be significantly reduced by building a bridge at either Kennard Street or Nosworthy Park.
  • Another option could be to use a removable bridge span as has been used in situations elsewhere, that could be an interim structure in conjunction with suitable path improvements close to Sherwood Road until this road upgrade takes place.
  • Consulting with community members with relevant professional expertise and local knowledge who wish to ensure the best possible outcome is achieved without wasting rate-payers dollars.


These options by achieving the establishment of a continuously linked bikeway system have many benefits over the ‘preliminary plan’ as proposed which is not consistent with this goal. Such benefits are significant:

  • avoiding a band aid temporary solution;
  • avoiding unnecessary expenditure;
  • avoiding destruction of habitat and amenity on Oxley Creek Common;
  • avoiding destruction of valued community assets (current play areas in Nosworthy park);
  • avoiding jeopardising safety by making an already well-used park into a thoroughfare;
  • avoiding environmental disturbance to Oxley Creek by building an unnecessary bridge.


A Community Meeting was held in Corinda on 16th November and was attended by over 75 apparently like-minded people who considered the pathway as planned was not the best option or most useful in the circumstances. A range of informed opinions – some of which are included above – were suggested. Cyclists reported that as their destination was usually the CBD the route of choice would always be the most direct – Oxley Road – the bikeway Stage II would not be used.


Information from the Bicycle Users’ Research Group Fact Sheet#1 (attached) draws attention to the increasing support (‘government, industry and community’) being given to

‘conserving remnant bushland and watercourses’ and that ‘if natural remnants are to remain available for conservation and or regeneration, [eg Oxley Creek Common] conservation values must be taken into much higher account in decisions [re] both locations and routes for pathways’……and that ‘arguably transport routes should never be located in such areas, but provide access …to them’.


This research indicates that to put this bikeway Stage II through such a conservation area would therefore be out of touch with current thinking. Outcomes to be expected would be ‘reduce[d] ecological and biological values’, increase in littering with higher use and reduced maintenance.


Information was supplied to the meeting by Professor Hugh Possingham about the economic contribution ($300,000 pa) to Brisbane that Oxley Creek Common generates by attracting international bird-watchers in addition to the recreational provision for local families. This confirms the need to protect this environmentally significant area from the intrusion of building such a cement path as such visits would quickly cease as bird populations declined.


It would appear that the prevailing community view, that this location is not the best option is supported by evidence from environmental, bicycle research and economic sources. Thus reconsideration of the Oxley Creek Bikeway Stage II is needed as it will not achieve the purpose for which it is planned without unacceptable costs.


It is a matter of dissatisfaction that Council has not listened to the knowledge and views of this local community on the changes recently proposed for this area and these changes have gone ahead regardless – arguably to the detriment of the community. It is of greater concern that the elected Councillor who has staunchly represented the views of this Ward – which I understood to be the purpose of having an elected representative – has been so determinedly disregarded by Council.  The residents of Tennyson Ward have frequently expressed such concerns in local newspapers.


I cannot see how this plan is consistent with Council’s stated intention to retain Brisbane’s image as ‘the most liveable city’ when so much environment and valued locations are under threat. Such a claim is surely only achieved through consultation and co-operation. A patchwork of unassociated projects will not achieve this aim.


Reconsideration of this plan in terms of the alternatives proposed in this submission is warranted. This would then achieve ‘continuous links in networks of cycling-friendly streets’, meet the needs of commuting cyclists and conserve the valued park and environmental areas for leisurely recreational use without the environmentally and economically costly necessity of building a bridge.


Yours faithfully

Marie Hollingworth


Daniel Benz
Last seen: 6 years 8 months ago
Joined: 23/08/2009 - 8:59pm
Bicycle QLD comments re Bikeway Corinda/Oxley Common

 Hi, I recently asked Bicycle QLD (am a paid up member) via their Facebook page their opinion of the proposed bikeway.  Judging from their response it seems they have been given the sno job treatment and obviously don't know the terrain or environmental issues.  A bit disappointing one of the main cycling lobby groups in QLD appears to be showing support for this project.  All the more reason for more voices to be heard rejecting current plan and asking for changes.

Curious to know what BQ's input was into proposed Rocklea Markets to Corinda via Oxley Common bikeway was. I attended recent public mtg at Corinda Bowls Club. Several keen commuter cyclists were of the opinion that route planned was unsuitable for commuters due to circuitous route nor recreational riders due to steep grade on corinda side at Nosworthy Park. What were BQ's suggestions?

Like ·  · Monday at 9:47pm · 

      Bicycle Queensland Daniel, BQ was briefed by the design team, and considered some alternate route (primarily bridge locations) suggestions but overall the project team's assessment seemed to make sense in terms of logistics, cost and accessibility. It was a balance between all types of riders and other users (walkers, joggers etc).
John Nightingale
Last seen: 2 years 5 months ago
Joined: 03/03/2010 - 1:04pm
Bicycle Queensland and its focus on events rather than advocacy

 Hello, Daniel,
It's not a surprise that BQ has taken a simplistic and conciliatory line as Council is one of their funding bodies, so it might be problematic for them to be too critical. BQ's focus has increasingly been on its events rather than on the minutiae of local small scale infrastructure. Advocacy can be difficult when its constituency is so diverse. BQ also lacks the expertise in environmental or engineering knowledge to apply any sensible critique to a 'plausible' presentation by the seasoned professionals on the bikeway team, with whom BQ expects to work cooperatively. Economists call this situation 'capture' of the advocates or regulators by the movers, and it's very common in the world of business/govt relations. Note how often the community can justifiably call 'whitewash' on a so-called 'independent' report on a pressing issue - the coal seam gas debacle already has many examples.

Nicole Johnston
Last seen: 8 years 3 months ago
Joined: 19/08/2009 - 8:48pm
Cr Nicole Johnston response to bikeway consultation

29 November 2011
Oxley Creek Bikeway Stage Two
Brisbane City Council
GPO Box 1434
Dear Bikeways Team
I am writing to make a submission as part of the public consultation process for the Oxley Creek Bikeway Stage Two Corinda to Brisbane Markets.
I have been publicly supportive of a separated, shared pathway for Sherwood and Corinda residents connecting through to Rocklea that provides better connectivity for local residents, but it must be in the right location, one that provides recreational benefits without adversely affecting the local environment.
I have been contacted by numerous individual residents and community groups including the Nosworthy Park Bushcare Group, Friends of Oxley Creek Common, Oxley Creek Catchment Association, the Walter Taylor South Action Group and Birds Queensland all of whom have expressed serious and genuine concerns about the Nosworthy Park option.
In my view, proceeding at Nosworthy Park without the support of these local stakeholders, all local volunteers who care, manage and use the local environment would be reckless and imprudent.
I have previously provided feedback to Council officers Graham Nell, Linsdsay Enright and Vanessa Kyle regarding this project on 10 December 2010 at a meeting in my office.
In summary, at that meeting, I advised that:

  • I did not support Nosworthy Park as the preferred location;
  • I supported off road footpaths rather than bike awareness zones (BAZs) in Corinda streets to provide safe access for pedestrians, people with prams and the disabled;
  • Council should consult on all three options (Kennard St, Martindale St and Nosworthy Park) with the community.

I note that none of these comments were reflected in the marketing material published by Council in October 2011 and presumably my comments were ignored.
I also note that at the meeting, and later at the Council Meeting of 15 November 2011 that Councillor Margaret De Wit personally made the decision to locate the bikeway route at Nosworthy Park for the following reason:

"I said looking at Kennard Street, putting bikes down that street where the bus depot is didn't seem like a real good idea to me."

Source Council Meeting, 15 November 2011.
Sherwood Road Pedestrian/Bikeway Upgrade
For the past almost four years I have been lobbying to upgrade pedestrian and Bikeway facilities along Sherwood Rd between the Sherwood Shops, railway station and the Brisbane Markets, ultimately connecting through to the Tarragindi Bikeway.
This includes:

  • a letter to then Chairman Councillor Jane Prentice in 2008 for consideration in the 2008-09 budget;
  • Tennyson Ward Budget submission 2009-10;
  • Tennyson Ward Budget submission 2010-11;
  • Tennyson Ward submission for the Sherwood Graceville Neighbourhood Plan 2010;
  • Tennyson Ward Budget submission 2011-12;
  • at various meetings with Council officers.

The Lord Mayor and Council have consistently refused to support the upgrade of pedestrian and bikeway facilities along Sherwood Rd.  It remains one of the most sought after pedestrian/cyclist safety improvements that local residents support in the area.
A dedicated shared pathway for pedestrians and cyclists along Sherwood Rd remains the number one safety and connectivitiy improvement that would broadly benefit residents, school children and workers in the ward.  It should be funded as a priority.
Nosworthy Park Option
I object to the proposed Nosworthy Park bridge location on the following grounds:

  • adverse impacts on the Creek's riparian zone and native habitat;
  • adverse impacts on the natural environment of Nosworthy Park and the Oxley Creek Common;
  • adverse impacts on locally, nationally and internationally significant bird habitat;
  • impact of a 3km concrete cycle track through the Oxley Creek Common habitat and wildlife;
  • significant adverse impacts of fill and geographic changes from earthworks to accomodate the bikeway within Nosworthy Park due to the gradient which may controbuted to hydrology changes and impact on flooding;
  • inappropriate wheelchair gradients greater than 10% causing accessibility issues for the disabled and for small children on bikes;
  • does not provide the safest or most direct connection into the Oxley Creek Commons existing community and recreation facilities;
  • the proposed location appears to require the remocal of hundreds of new trees planted as part of flood recovery works on the eastern side of Oxley Creek in the common;
  • safety impacts of the proposed pathway location in Nosworth Park impacting on the current basketball, toilet, playground and informal open space.

I also attach an excellent spreadsheet from the Friends of Oxley Creek Common outlining the clear advantages of the alternate sites proposed by Council.  I recommend that this research is very carefully considered.
It provides valid and comprehensive reasons outlining why the shared pathway would be better located at either Sherwood Rd or Kennard St.  Both of these locations offer greater connectivity, access and safety benefits to residents in the district including for school children who regularly use the Jerrold St underpass to connect between Corinda and Sherwood.
There are a number of available alternatives which Council officers have scoped and Council is aware of but has chosen not to provide to the community for consideration and consultation.
Of these, Kennard St appears to offer the best option as it provides:

  • greater north south connectivity, given its proximity to the Jerrold St underpass;
  • direct east-west access to the existing community and recreational facilities of the Oxley Creek Common near the Environment Centre;
  • good access to the Corinda Shops, rail station and schools;
  • better future connectivity to Sherwood Rd as an integrated pedestrian/cycle/public transport node.

Lack of Community Consultation
Finally, many members of the community are disappointed that Council has failed to engage in full, interactive community consultation by failing to attend community meetings and answer community questions.
Despite placing questions on notice at Council on 3 November 2011, almost four weeks ago, I have had no response at all.  Council has been unwilling to provide basic information about the project's technical, environmental and cost issues prior to the community consultation closing to ais informed comment.
In my views, residents are rightly concerned that this approach does not reflect a genuine desire to fully consult with the community and most importantly listen to their views.
Yours sincerely
Nicole Johnston
Councillor for Tennyson

Sara Buchanan
Last seen: 2 years 4 months ago
Joined: 18/11/2011 - 9:15pm
Oxley Creek Bikeway Stage 2 - and Alternatives

Oxley Creek Bikeway Stage 2 Community Feedback –
Councillor Nicole Johnston,
State Member for Indooroopilly, Scott Emmerson MP,
State Member for Yeerongpilly, Simon Finn MP,
Lord Mayor of Brisbane, Graham Quirk,

Bicycle Queensland, Bill Loveday (President) –
RACQ, Geoff Leddy (President),
Walter Taylor South Action Group, Allan Howard (President) –
Birds Queensland, Mike West (President) –




I write with regard to the pedestrian and cycle bridge across Oxley Creek that is being proposed as Stage 2B (Corinda to Brisbane Markets) of the Oxley Creek Bikeway.  it is my understanding that the bikeway necessarily crosses Oxley Creek at some point, and that the point chosen by Council is Nosworthy Park, Corinda.


It is apparent from the newsletters and from discussion at the recent Community meeting held 16th November at Corinda Bowls Club that stage 2 of the bikeway serves two purposes.

  1. Safe regional east-west cycle route, linking regional destinations such as Brisbane Markets and Oxley Common through to the transport nodes and local business centres of Sherwood and Corinda, and to other regional routes such as the north-south Oxley Road route.
  2. Enable local Sherwood and Corinda residents to access the neighbouring regional parkland (Oxley Creek Common) on foot.


I wholeheartedly support each of these purposes, and I applaud Council and the Lord Mayor for their support and commitment to new bikeway infrastructure and community enrichment programs such as these.


However, I am concerned that Council proposes to co-locate these two potentially conflicting purposes on the same piece of infrastructure.  I concede that it may be possible in some circumstances where proper management of user expectations and behaviour occurs.  I do not believe this level of management is possible for the length and circumstances of the stage 2B bikeway currently proposed.  Please be advised that I do not support the route through Oxley Creek Common, nor the Nosworthy Park bridge location.  My reasoning is outlined below:

1. Sherwood Road 'Black Spot' - should be upgraded, not avoided.

 Of primary concern is that the proverbial 'elephant in the room' has been ignored when selecting a location to serve this dual purposes.  I am referring to the portion of Sherwood Road that lise atop and between the Tennyson rail line overpass and the Oxley Creek Bridge.  This piece of roadway:

  • Is approximately 400m long;
  • Forms the gateway between the Indooroopilly and Yerrongipilly electorages;
  • Carries a significant volume of traffic (may be Main Roads' jurisdiction?);
  • bridges Oxley Creek on an old, low level, two lane bridge;
  • bridges the Tennyson Rail Line (predominately freight line) on a short sharp very narrow overpass;
  • has no paved footpath except on the bridges; the footpath is on the north side of one bridge and on the south side of the other, with no safe crossing point anywhere in between;
  • has kerb and channling to the south side of the road but this is broken by extensive driveway crossings into industrial premises including the new Sherwood Bus Station entrance;
  • has no kerb and channeling on the north side of the road, with a wide verge used extensively for informal staff parking for the adjacent industrial premises
  • has reportedly been the site of several cyclist accidents (specifically, on the narrow rail overpass);
  • experiences western glare in the late afternoon (specifically, on the westbound pinch up to the rail overpass);
  • appears unsafe and, as a result, is  rarely traversed by pedestrians, and only tackled by confident cyclists


All roads contain some risk, this 400m stretch of road contains many.  In risk assessment terms, the consequences range from low through to high and the likelihood of those consequences happening are medium to high to already occurred, which means the overall risk category for this piece of road should be at least medium if not high.  It should be deemed a high priority for upgrade.


The contrast between this 400m stretch of road and adjacent stretches is significant.  The adjacent roads are not poster pin-ups - they are tired looking and not up to current standard either - but they at least feature line-marking, kerbs, channels, footpaths, cycle symbols, better accident records, and active pedestrians.  They are still functional for most would-be users, whereas the 400m stretch between the Tennyson line and Oxley Creek is truly the 'missing link' for everyonel motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians.  I implore each of you to visit this stretch of road and dare you to park your car on it, get out, and walk the length of it.


In the planning of this cycle link between the Brisbane Markets and Corinda, Council has chosen to avoide this black spot.  The tyranny of this small decision is that the long term solution is pushed further out of reach.  Bypassing cyclists and pedestrians around this black spot increases the illegibility of the cycle network.  It also discourages active transport from the closest train station (Sherwood) to the Common, and to the markets.  More critically, it removes on of the high consequences from the desktop risk assessment (despite the fact that some confident cyclists will persist in staking their rightful position on the road) and thereby ensures the road upgrade is demoted further down the priority list.


 I am fully aware that upgrading this 400m stretch of road which contains road, rail, bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure is going to take a lot of coordination between state and local government departments.  I acknowledge that significant management of user expectations and behaviour will be required.  However, if there is one location in which such coordination between departments and mutual respect between users can occur, it is in a highly alerted road environment at the gateway between electorates in a street frontage with commercial tenants, such as this one.


To the sitting members of local and state electorates: I urge each of you to champion this cause and use your cross-departmental influence to help the required governing 'purchasers' and 'providers' to coordinate and progress this road upgrade.  To the BCC Bikeway Projects Team, and the Active Transport Unit generally: I urge you to NOT take the easy bypass onption, to NOT piggy back off a local community linkage, and to instead tackle the true issue of cycle connectivity in this local area.  I reaslise that coordination involved in this road upgrade is bigger than your unit was probably ever established to deal with.  While you may not be able to create the change, I encourage you to instead be the catalyst for change.  I challenge you to spearhead the issue by inviting all government stakeholders to the table.


2. Cycle connectivity - make logical, legible connections to match actual desire lines


The sketch attached entitled Easter Corinda Cycle Connectivity describes my local perception of the cycle links - existing and potential - that need to be reinforced here in eastern Corinda in order to establish a legible 'network'.  While all strips of bitument (road) and concrete (footpath) are potentially the domain of the bicycle and are part of the cycle network, reinforcing the through-routes and facilitating permeability through or access across apparent barriers is essential.  This sketch shows:

  • Regional Connectivity East-West:Bicycle awareness zones (BAZ) to full length of Sherwood road, from Sherwood Train Station in the west to the Rocklea Markets in the east and beyond to Marshall Road and the Southeast Freeway bikeway.
  • Regional Connectivity North-South: Bicycle awareness zones (BAZ) to the full length of Oxley Road, from Indooroopilly Bridge in the north to Ipswich Motorway in the south and beyond on Blunder Road to the Logan Motorway
  • Local connectivity east from Corinda Station via Donaldson Street to Nosworthy Park and Corinda Bowls Club.  This requires a new pedestrian/cycle crossing of Oxley Road, between the Corinda Library and Donaldson Street.  Donaldson Street is not a traffic lighted street and has low traffic volume and speed, and is therefore suited to conversion to a bicycle awareness zone.  It is also the axis between the Station, the Library and the Nosworthy Park.
  • Local connectivity north south through east Corinda: Bicycle Awareness zone (BAZ) to full length of Clara Street, from the tunnel inthe north to Lynne Grove in the south, and beyong to Corinda State High School, George Scalett Park and Corinda State Primary School.
  • Missing link - Clara Street to Sherwood Road and beyond - Three possible routes are identified.  One via Jerrold Street, one via the Sherwood Bus Depot, and one via Kennard Street and Oxley Common.  These are explored in section 3 below.


As you can see on this overall eastern Corinda cycle connectivity plan, a link east through Nosworthy Park and then cutting north through Oxley Common does not recognise the true missing link and desire line.  The true missing link is between the northern top of Clara Street and Sherwood Road and beyong to the northern section of the Oxley Creek Bikeway.  This missing link happens to be the general desire line of city-bound commuters who reside in this easter section of Corinda and Oxley.


It seems clear that a bikeway via Nosworthy Park and Oxley Common will not serve the purpose it was intended to server and, rather than being a key link in the network, promises nothing more than a recreational side-route.  Indeed, it promises less - it promises one whole kilometre of unmitigated conflicts between disparate user groups.


3. Bridging the missing link - get the correct route and infrastructure


Please find attached two sketches describing various options for bridging the missing link between the northern end of Clara Street and Sherwood Road.  They each involve significant infrastructure.


3.1 Via Jerrold Street

 Upgrade the existing narrow steep pedestrian underpass ("tunnel") under the Tennyson Rail line in order to cater for cyclists.  Complement it with a bicycle awareness zone on Jerrold Street and a safe crossing point of Sherwood road to access the northern section of the Oxley Creek Bikeway.

3.2 Via Bus Depot

 Create a 3m offroad bikeway link along the northern edge of the bus depot site, parallel to the train line and travelling via the historic Mill site.  In the short term it would exist at the new signalised intersection at the entry to the bus depot.  In the longer term, the height and span of any upgraded railway overpass could accomodate a safe offroad loop under Sherwood road and up on the other side in front of the Komatsu boundary.  A link through the 'Parklands at Sherwood' townhouse development, past the bioretention basins, and dow to the northern section of the Oxley Creek Bikeway would complete the link.

3.3 Via Kennard Street

 This link is not as legible as either of the above two options in terms of cycle connectivity and should only be actioned after the Sherwood Road upgrade has occurred.  It required a bicycle awareness zone along Railway Terrace and Kennard Street as a minimum, with the opportunity for off road path to occur in some lengths (refer oppportunities, discussed below).  Importantly the bridge across Oxley Creek must 'touch down' on the Common to a point that is north of the existing swing gate.  The path must then follow the fenced boundary of the Red Shed 'paddock' out to Sherwood Road.  The emphasis is on this specific route in order to minimise user group conflicts at the Common.  For example, bird-watching on the Common is a regional tourist attraction and by its nature it precludes any use of the existing gravel pathway south of the swing gate by through-cyclists.  The Red Shed and pontoon is a nodal point and cutting through such a node should be avoided.  Similarly the lawn area south of the Shed is an active node for model aeroplane enthusiasts and, while the path would be in the flight zone, it would at least avoid the take-off and landing areas.


Two further opportunities also present themselves, as located on plan.  One is to purchase the house between the 'tunnel' and the Bus Depot 'park' to optimise the path juntion and the approach to the tunnel, and help manage the need for rail corridor maintenance access through this same linkage corridor.  The other is to narrow the road pavelement of Railway Terrace where there are only residential lots on one side of the road.  The expanded verge area could be used to extend the green buffer to the bus depot, and/or to house an offroad bikeway.  Alternatively it could be 'traded' with the bus depot in the manner of a boundary adjustment to compensate for land used as bikeway traversing the bus depot.


4. Unsuitability of Nostworthy Park route


I trust that other memebers of the community will be writing volumes to you about the things that make the Nosworthy Park route unsuitable.  I will not attempt to repeat their work here bus instead offer the following summary:

  • Conflict between the largely passive activities of the user groups in both Nosworthy Park and Oxley Commin, and the active use of the path as a cyleway
  • Grading from the bridge up to the Bowls Club is steep to the point of being inequitable for most user groups, including people with disabilities, cyclists, and other users of wheeled recreational devices.  The gradient also presents a safety hazard on the downhill run, with curves to negotiate at the same time.
  • There is a 'squeeze point' between the toilet block and the corner of the bowls club that will heighten the user group conflicts.  There is no alternative route, the path must pass through this point, and there is little that can be done to 'design out' the risks.  A park full of regulatory signage is an unwelcome solution.
  • The creekbank slopes are unstable, with a significant land slip immediately adjacent to the 'squeeze point'.
  • Construction access for the pathways is a 'one way in, one way out' scenario on each side of the creek.  This will pose significant user group conflicts for the duration of the construction period.  Oxley Creek Common users in particular have only recently won back the right of access to their park following the floods.


I thank you for your time in reviewing this letter, and the attached sketches.  I trust you will find useful information herin to help guide the project forward towards an outcome that is agreeable to the community and facilitates the links that will be required for Sherwood and Corinda's active transport future.


Thank you for your investment in community infrastructure such as bikeways and park linkages, I encourage you to continue this sort of investment across our electorate.


Yours sincerely

Sara Buchanan

(Registered member of AILA, RACQ, Bicycle Queensland, and Birds Queensland and resident of eastern Corinda).


Reference image - Nearmap aerial photo dated 16th September 2011

Last seen: 2 weeks 4 days ago
Joined: 10/07/2009 - 10:49pm
Bikeway Council Minutes 15-Nov-2011



The Chairman of Council (Councillor Krista Adams) then drew the Councillors’ attention to the notified motion listed on the agenda, and called on Councillor JOHNSTON to move the motion. Accordingly, Councillor
JOHNSTON moved, seconded by Councillor Fiona KING, that?

That this Council resolve to send Brisbane City Council Oxley Creek Bikeway Officers to attend a community meeting for Corinda residents on Wednesday 16 November 2011 to provide information and answer questions about the proposed Oxley Creek Bridge and Bikeway as requested by the residents.


Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

Well I thank Councillor KING for her democratic spirit. I'll start by saying, Madam Chairman that this Council for the past two years has promised that it will consult on the location of the proposed Oxley Creek bikeway. That is the commitment that was made first by Councillor Jane Prentice, then it was made by Councillor de WIT. It is Councillor Julian SIMMONDS apparently that does not support proper community consultation on this bikeway.


It is of great concern that residents who requested meetings with the Oxley Creek bikeway team, that is representatives of the Nosworthy Creek Bush Care Group and OCCA, had meetings planned with Council officers, which Council officers then cancelled at the last minute. I understand they then did go and meet with the Nosworthy Bush Care Group but have not yet met with OCCA. I am
extremely concerned that this Council has published letters via the LORD MAYOR, and the former Lord Mayor, indicating it would engage in consultation with residents about the location of this bridge and bikeway.


It has not done so. Council has put out a flyer with information but it has failed to engage in proper interactive responsive consultation. All residents are simply asking is that Council officers attend the bikeway meeting for approximately 20 minutes to provide a presentation to the community about the Nosworthy Creek proposal. I'm certainly getting very strong feedback that this is not a location that is supported for a range of reasons, but most primarily the environmental impact upon the creek habitat and the creek itself.


Certainly the Nosworthy Park Bush Care Group and OCCA have worked extremely hard in this location to undertake a rehabilitation of the habitat along the creek bank. What is particularly concerning when you look at the Council files which I have done repeatedly, is that it is very clear that the Council officers supported three locations, three possible locations for this bikeway.  Firstly Kennard Street, secondly Martindale Street and thirdly Nosworthy Park.


It's seems that at some point over the past year, and it's not clear who has made this decision, so one can only assume that it's been made at the most senior levels, that a decision was taken to build the bikeway in Nosworthy Park. It is very clear from the Council files that detailed design and planning for Nosworthy Park is well advanced, costings and all of the things necessary are to build a bridge at that location. If you are genuinely going to listen to what
residents tell you, it seems premature to be going through all of that if you do not intend to change your mind and be responsive to community concerns.


I have a very strong feeling that this will be just like the bus depot and the five storey issues. Corinda residents are going to have lip service paid to their very genuine concerns about this proposed bikeway. I'd like to quote a resident who has published a flyer which has gone around in our community. It certainly says that they felt like and this is a quote—they felt like the Council officers were
simply doing their job—design and manage and move onto another place. They have few facts at their fingertips and had problems following where their blue line in the photo represented on the ground, let alone where the bridge would actually go.


They say that Sherwood Road which has been a huge priority of mine for the past four years is in Council's too hard basket. Now that's actually in the flyer that the LORD MAYOR has put out, that he is considering building a bikeway along Sherwood Road. So while the LORD MAYOR is publicly promoting that as an option, privately, he refuses to fund it and it's been put up year after year in the Tennyson Ward budget submission. Secondly, Council officers flat out tell residents that it's in the too-hard basket.


Now, Madam Chairman, I think that's deceptive. I have real concerns with the public flyers on this project saying one thing, and then the Council officers coming along and I think probably telling the truth in this case. There are a number of objections to this proposal and that includes the location of the concrete pathway, the impact of the bridge on the waterway, the impact on the  existing facilities, the gradient of the pathway and a whole heap of other reasons.


Certainly there have been a lot of concerns raised about the riparian zone and the impact of flooding. This is something that is of huge concern to residents in that part of Corinda because they were flooded. The residents stressed several times the necessity of Council coming to the meeting on 16 November. That's not going to happen though. Certainly the resident indicated that—let me quote here, ‘...BCC will send no one to the public meeting on the sixteenth. It is not their policy to come to meetings as people ask too many questions and people go away dissatisfied.’


That's a direct quote from the Council officer who spoke to a resident. This resident again expressed her concern that as a ratepayer she felt that they were being treated with and I quote, ‘...complete disdain and disregard.’ She asked if Council was unwilling to come to the meeting, when were they going to hold the
public consultation that the LORD MAYOR was promoting in his flyer.


The very sad part of all of that is that no public consultation is planned. I'm extremely disappointed. I've lodged a number of questions on notice which I hope will actually get residents' answers.


I've encouraged them to make a submission. I certainly have great concerns in which Nosworthy Park has been selected behind closed doors and seems to be, based on the Council files, a fait accompli. I would certainly say to Corinda residents that they need to speak up, that they need to make submissions as I know they are doing. I certainly hope that this Council, unlike what it has done in this district previously, listens and genuinely listens to the concerns of these residents, because there are multiple other viable locations which the Council officers themselves have made this administration aware of.


It is of great concern that they are not listening, that they are not properly engaging with the Corinda residents. I would certainly hope that someone will at least stand up and explain why they're not prepared to support Council officers coming to a meeting to brief residents on a bikeway which they are concerned about.


Chairman: Further debate? Councillor SIMMONDS?


Councillor SIMMONDS:

Thank you, Madam Chairman. While there was a lot in that speech by Councillor JOHNSTON, I will address most of those issues now, Madam Chairman. But before I start on what Councillor JOHNSTON said, I'd like to  start with what she didn't. What she didn't say, Madam Chairman, is her position as the local councillor. What does she support, Madam Chairman, because you know what? This is reminding me very much of a certain park, Madam Chairman, in her electorate where again, we all agree a park is a good idea.


But it was Councillor JOHNSTON who then went out there and picked holes and stirred up the community angst, Madam Chairman, on a number of falsehoods I might say, Madam Chairman, and failed to either support or not support the park. So, Madam Chairman, I was—


Councillor JOHNSTON: Point of order, Madam Chairman.


Chairman: Point of order, Councillor JOHNSTON.


Councillor JOHNSTON: Claim to be misrepresented.


Councillor SIMMONDS:

I will certainly be contacting Councillor JOHNSTON to find out what her stand is, Madam Chairman, on this issue and what she supports because that's all part of the consultation, Madam Chairman, which is what we are doing at the moment. We want to hear from local residents, Madam Chairman. We want to hear from Councillor JOHNSTON, if she feels so inclined to grace us with her
opinion. We know that this bikeway was originally scheduled for construction in 2011. It was delayed due to the flood of course and I have now, as the Chairman for Public and Active Transport, commenced consultation in October, Madam Chairman.


It is a genuine consultation, Madam Chairman. Yes we have done work on a number of options, of course we have, Madam Chairman. Why would we go out to the community on options which we didn't know anything about, Madam Chairman? There is no point in that. Yes we have done work, of course we have.


On top of that we've come up with a preferred option, Madam Chairman, based on that work we've done. But we want to hear from local residents, Madam Chairman.


That is why we put out to 6000 households and businesses, Madam Chairman, this project newsletter. What does it say specifically? “Have your say. Council is interested in comm unity feedback on the proposed work for the Oxley Creek bikeway stage two. To provide feedback or find out more about this project you
can.” It then goes on to list no more than five different ways that residents can provide this Council with feedback about the route, Madam Chairman, because this is what it's all about.


We want to hear from local residents about the route so the officers can then go away and do further detailed design work so that further consultation can then occur. So then a decision can then be made and this important bikeway link can be constructed, Madam Chairman. I don't know how Councillor JOHNSTON can, with a straight face, stand up in this chamber and say we are not doing any public consultation when 6000 of these brochures are out in her ward.


Madam Chairman, when Council officers have met repeatedly with a number of stakeholders, in fact just an hour ago, they held the latest meeting with the Oxley Creek Catchment Association, the Nosworthy Park Bush Care Group, the Friends of Oxley Group Common Group and others. So they are out there, the Council officers are out there at the moment doing the consultation, Madam


Madam Chairman, she talked about the different options for the bridge and yes there are different options for the bridge. I would encourage local residents to tell us what they think about where this bridge is to be positioned. That's why we're doing the community consultation to hear that, Madam Chairman. But I make the point because Councillor JOHNSTON specifically made the point
about the Kennard Street location, Madam Chairman, and that she was concerned about the environmental impact of locating it other than Kennard Street.


Well I have to say, Madam Chairman, and it is in the brochure that went out to 6000 people, that the reason Kennard Street is not the preferred option of Council officers and myself, is because it would cause greater environmental impact than the preferred option, Madam Chairman, a greater environmental impact.


Do you know what? She also mentioned that she was concerned about flooding. Part of that environmental impact is that our hydrology reports show that it could have an adverse flooding impact on up to four of her local residents, Madam Chairman.


But where is she sticking up for them, Madam Chairman? Where is that? I don't hear their concerns coming in here, so Councillor JOHNSTON needs to get her facts right. If she's genuinely interested in engaging in public consultation, then she will encourage her residents to send in their comments, or request a meeting, to the five different ways that this brochure sets out, Madam Chairman, so that we can hear from them instead of hearing the political spin from the Councillor opposite.


So with that I move an amendment to the motion, Madam Chairman.


It was moved by Councillor SIMMONDS, seconded by Councillor WINES that the motion be amended by deleting all words after ‘Council’ and replacing them with the following:

recognising the need to consult residents in relation to important local projects, acknowledges that Brisbane City Council officers are currently conducting community consultation, including meeting directly with Corinda residents, environmental and community groups and other relevant stakeholders to provide information, answer questions and seek feedback about the proposed Oxley Creek bikeway.

Councillor JOHNSTON: Point of order, Madam Chair.

Chairman: Point of order, Councillor Johnston.

Councillor JOHNSTON:

Madam Chairman, I draw to your attention the incompetency of the proposed amendment. The proposed amendment simply seeks to keep three words, the preliminary words, that this Council. It then seeks to irrevocably and substantially change the intent of the notified motion which it is extremely clear is that they attend a community on Wednesday 16 November 2011.


The changes that are being made here fundamentally and substantially strike at the heart of that motion. Madam Chairman, it should be ruled out of order as it's no longer consistent with the original intent of the motion.


Councillor JOHNSTON that is not a point of order and I hereby warn you if you disrupt this meeting by points of order that are an act of disorder you may be suspended for period of eight days.


Warning – Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON
The Chairman then formally warned Councillor JOHNSTON that unless she desisted from disrupting the meeting with points of order that were an act of disorder she would be suspended from the service of the Council for a period of up to eight days. Furthermore, Councillor JOHNSTON was warned that, if she were suspended from the service of the Council, she would be excluded from the Council Chamber, ante-Chamber, public gallery and other meeting places for the period of suspension.


Councillor JOHNSTON: Point of order, Madam Chairman.


Chairman: Make sure it's a correct one Councillor JOHNSTON or you'll be leaving for eight days.


Councillor JOHNSTON: I am seeking clarification...



That is not what your point of order said. Resume your seat. I made it very clear last week at the beginning of Hansard, which I'm sure you have read very well Councillor JOHNSTON, that there are three things that point of order are used for. Debating the chairman or any other councillor in this chamber is not one of those and will be ruled as an act of disorder as I have just done. I would like to
read the amendment so I can make my own decision thank you very much. Did you want to stay with the point of order? No. Thank you.



I uphold the amendment as holding the integrity of the motion. It is a community consultation which includes meeting directly. It is about providing information, it is about answering questions. It upholds the integrity of the original motion. Councillor SIMMONDS.


Councillor JOHNSTON: Point of order, Madam Chairman.


Chairman: Point of order, Councillor JOHNSTON.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

I dissent in your ruling and I dissent in the fact that you would not allow me to raise a point of order.


The dissent motion lapsed for want of a seconder.


Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON there's no seconder to that dissent. I allowed you to raise the point of order. I just said it was incorrect. Councillor SIMMONDS.


Councillor JOHNSTON: Thank you.


Councillor SIMMONDS:

Thank you, Madam Chairman. Well speaking to the amendment it is very important that we amend this motion today, because the motion as it was first presented is nothing to be honest but a cheap political point scoring exercise, Madam Chairman. If anything, we are in furious agreement. We are in furious agreement, that there needs to be consultation with the local community about
this bikeway.


So I've amended this motion to ensure that it accurately reflects the community consultation that is going on at the moment, community consultation that this administration initiated, and community consultation that this administration is committed to. Madam Chairman, because more than anything else we want the opportunity for every individual, no matter what their views on the bikeway, for or against, different routes, not different route, to have the opportunity to have their say, Madam Chairman.


Time and time again, as part of consultation processes we have seen public meetings are not the way, because invariably a loud voice dominates and we do not, as a Council, get to hear from the numerous other residents, Madam Chairman. That's not what I want, Madam Chairman. Councillor JOHNSTON may want that. She may want to be the loud voice at the meeting herself. But, Madam Chairman, I want to hear from every resident. I would be
happy if all 6000 residents who got the newsletter sent in their comments, Madam Chairman.


That's why I provided five different ways of giving them every opportunity to do that, Madam Chairman. But not only have we done that, but Council officers are out there now and that's another reason why I move this amendment because it more accurately reflects the situation, that Council officers, senior Council officers are out there now, Madam Chairman, meeting with local residents about this issue and taking their feedback, Madam Chairman.


They're meeting with individuals. They met on the ninth of the eleventh at 3.30pm and then again at 4pm with different groups of local residents, Madam Chairman. They've also met three times, three times, Madam Chairman, already, taking into account the meeting that occurred just an hour ago, with groups from the Oxley
Creek Catchment Association, Nosworthy Park Bush Care Group, Friends of Oxley Creek Common Group, Madam Chairman, on the ninth of the eleventh, the fourteenth of the eleventh and again today on the fifteenth of the eleventh, led by various groups of people, three different people on each occasion.


So the officers are doing an excellent job. They are getting out there. They are putting together a comprehensive community consultation process, Madam Chairman. That's what we're committed to, not cheap political point scoring. I would point out, Madam Chairman, that there are people in Councillor JOHNSTON's own ward, in that community who are also dedicated to proper consultation, Madam Chairman. Matt Brodie, for example, springs to mind who is dedicated to proper consultation, Madam Chairman.


Matt Brodie should be congratulated for that and I hope that the other residents are not swayed by Councillor JOHNSTON's cheap political scoring—and do participate in this genuine consultation process, Madam Chairman, so that we can create a bikeway project which is not only good for the cycling community, for the pedestrian community but also for the local community, Madam Chairman.  Thank you.


Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON you claim to be misrepresented.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

Yes, Madam Chairman. Councillor SIMMONDS claimed earlier that I was stirring up falsehoods in respect to a park project which wasn't relevant to this debate. Madam Chairman, that is absolutely untrue. It is a misrepresentation of the facts in this matter and I find his comments offensive.


Chairman: Any further debate on the amended motion?


Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes.


Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

Yes I rise to speak on the proposed amendment and I will state that I do not support the amendment. I do not support the amendment because it is a slap in the face to residents. I think Councillor SIMMONDS is a little bit confused here and I'm going to be very happy to publish his speech to my residents after this
meeting. It's not me calling for a public meeting. I think he needs to understand that as clearly as possible. It is a group of residents who are represented within the following organisations. The Nosworthy Creek Bush Care Group, the Walter Taylor South Action Group, OCCA and the Friends of Oxley Common.


There is a small group of residents who are extremely concerned. Of their own volition, they decided they wanted to have a community meeting. They published the flyers. They weren't even photocopied in my office. They published the flyers. They told people to come along. They asked Council officers to come along and give a presentation. Council officers refused to do so.


Now this amendment seeks, as Councillor SIMMONDS own words say, to reflect what is actually going on now. That is the problem. What residents want is a public meeting.


What I will say to you is here is a quote from another resident. This is again, this is sent to the LORD MAYOR so I'm not making these things up. But I won't mention the resident's name because I know that will get me into trouble. Here is from the resident and all of my quotes previously Councillor SIMMONDS were directly from residents. So I'll certainly be happy to give your comments to them
about what they said, not me. Let me be very clear.


This is a quote from a resident, ‘The bikeway team have been invited to attend a community meeting on Wednesday 16 November to discuss aspects of the plan for the community. They advise they will not attend but speak only to those who write to them...’ and this is a direct quote. This smacks of divide and rule.


They're meeting individually with community members, again there is no transparency. Well, if you want to insult the residents, that's fine, Councillor SIMMONDS. But it's going to be on the—


Councillor SIMMONDS: Claim to be misrepresented, Madam Chairman.


Chairman: Point of order, please, Councillor SIMMONDS.


Councillor SIMMONDS: Point of order, Madam Chairman.


Chairman: Thank you, Councillor SIMMONDS. Your point of order.


Councillor SIMMONDS: Claim to be misrepresented.


Chairman: Thank you.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

The concerns of the residents to talk about the fact that the community don't know what's being discussed with other residents. They have very strong concerns about the evaluation process that's happening internally. They talk about the importance of transparency.


There is a strong feeling—and this is a direct quote—there is a strong feeling in the community that our voice, i.e. suggestions, concerns and preferences, are not heeded. Now let me say that's not me. That's a direct quote from a resident who's written to the LORD MAYOR. Now, Councillor SIMMONDS, if you have not read these emails, I suggest that you—


Councillor COOPER: Point of order, Madam Chair.


Chairman: Point of order. Councillor COOPER.


Councillor COOPER:

I would remind Councillor JOHNSTON, through you, Madam Chair, that she is to direct her comments to you.


Chairman: Thank you very much, Councillor COOPER. Yes, Councillor JOHNSTON, continue.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

Yes, Madam Chairman. I would suggest that you perhaps suggest to your colleague, Councillor SIMMONDS that he needs to have a look at some of these emails that are coming in. Residents are extremely concerned that they're not being listed to. The only thing they're seeking to do here is to improve the type of public consultation.


No one has got an objection to council officers meeting with individual residents. I have no objection to that whatsoever. That is what Council is doing already. The motion that has been put forward, which is now being amended, certainly is taking away that additional request that residents have made.


Let me say this. This is again another quote from the same resident. ‘Recent surveys of Brisbane citizens about dissatisfaction with the consultation processes state that this is a major dissatisfaction.’ So people are pretty much aware of how this Council consults. They're pretty wise out my way to the purpose of
individual meetings. They are extremely concerned that their genuine request for council officers to come and brief a group of them—and I don't think it would be a very big group myself—but to come and brief a group of them is just being ignored.


It's been described by Councillor SIMMONDS repeatedly tonight, their request has been described by Councillor SIMMONDS as a cheap political stunt. Well let me tell you, that is the message that I will certainly be letting them know.


Councillor SIMMONDS: Point of order, Madam Chairman.


Chairman: Point of order. Councillor SIMMONDS.


Councillor SIMMONDS: Claim to be misrepresented again.


Chairman: Thank you. Councillor JOHNSTON.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

Several times, several times. A cheap political stunt. I certainly will be sending them a transcript of this debate so they can see for themselves the discourteous and disrespectful way that Councillor SIMMONDS today has responded to their genuine concerns for a public meeting.


I won't be voting for this amendment because it does not give credit to the request that they are seeking. It certainly in my view, it lacks competence as well.


Chairman: Councillor SIMMONDS, you claim to be misrepresented twice.


Councillor SIMMONDS:

Madam Chairman, first of all, I claim to be misrepresented when Councillor JOHNSTON claimed that I was insulting residents. I most certainly was not. I was responding to some of the concerns that Councillor JOHNSTON raised and responding to those.


I also claim to be misrepresented—I did not claim any meeting was a cheap political stunt, Madam Chairman. I claimed that Councillor JOHNSTON's motion was a cheap political stunt, Madam Chairman.


Frankly, I hope Councillor JOHNSTON does give them the transcript because it will clearly show that I am encouraging them to respond to the consultation and that I will take into account their concerns—


Chairman: Thank you, Councillor SIMMONDS.


Councillor SIMMONDS: —as opposed to Councillor JOHNSTON.


Chairman: Thank you, Councillor SIMMONDS. Any further debate on the amendment? Councillor de WIT.


Councillor JOHNSTON: Just claim to be misrepresented, Madam Chairman.


Chairman: You can do that claim now, Councillor JOHNSTON, before Councillor de WIT speaks.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

Yes, thank you. Councillor SIMMONDS just said that I said he insulted residents, Madam Chairman. I didn't say that. I said he treated them with a lack of courtesy and disrespect.


Councillor SIMMONDS: Point of order, Madam Chairman.


Chairman: Point of order. Councillor SIMMONDS.


Councillor SIMMONDS: I claim to be misrepresented.


Chairman: Yes. Now. Thank you.


Councillor SIMMONDS:

I most certainly did not, Madam Chairman, treat any residents with discourtesy or not treat them with respect. I gave this motion the respect it deserves and that is the respect of a cheap political stunt on behalf of Councillor JOHNSTON.

Madam Chairman, I give the feedback I received from individual residents every due care and respect.


Chairman: Thank you. Councillor de WIT.


Councillor JOHNSTON: Point of order, Madam Chairman.


Chairman: Point of order. Councillor JOHNSTON.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

Just a clarification of the rules, that you've allowed Councillor SIMMONDS today to claim a point of misrepresentation about a point of order. That matter has been previously ruled out by Councillor OWEN-TAYLOR who warned me for questioning her ruling just two weeks ago, I believe. Perhaps you could clarify the rules for us, as she has previously said you're not allowed to do that.


Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, I am not clarifying any rules that have been done by my Deputy Chair in this place because I was not in the Chamber at the time. Councillor de WIT.


Councillor de WIT: Thank you, Madam Chairman.


Councillor JOHNSTON: Point of order, Madam Chairman.


Chairman: Point of order. Councillor de WIT. Councillor JOHNSTON.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

Well, Madam Chairman, could you please tell us what the rule is? Are you entitled to claim a point of order—sorry, are you allowed to claim misrepresentation about matters raised in a point of order?



Councillor JOHNSTON, if you are speaking about a councillor and they believe that you are misrepresenting them, they can claim a misrepresentation. It wasn't a point of order that he was claiming misrepresentation on. It was a misrepresentation that you were claiming as well. So it was not actually a point of order that he was claiming misrepresentation on. Councillor de WIT.


Councillor de WIT:

Thank you, Madam Chairman. Well, Madam Chairman, I rise to support the amendment on this motion. I hope, as Councillor SIMMONDS said, that Councillor JOHNSTON sends the entire Hansard out to her residents, not just the little bits that suit her. Because, Madam Chairman, there is a real history with this bikeway. It goes back to when I was Chairman of Public and Active Transport last year.


Councillor JOHNSTON claimed that not letting the council officers go to a meeting is a slap in the face to the residents. I'll tell you what's a slap in the face to the residents, the fact that Councillor JOHNSTON, as the local councillor, back as far as July last year, refused to provide any opinion on the proposed changes to this bikeway.


Madam Chairman, I can explain to Councillor JOHNSTON. She's put
23 questions on notice here, to really tie up the poor old officers, all about this bikeway. Madam Chairman, I can answer most of those. I haven't been in that role since March of this year.


But, Madam Chairman, let me just explain. Back in—it would have been—July last year, I wrote to Councillor JOHNSTON, because I had gone out, I looked at the map with the Kennard Street option and I wasn't convinced that possibly it was the best option, given that the officers had provided other options.


So, Madam Chairman, one weekend I went out and I walked that area and I had a good look at it. I then met with the council officers, and there were three of them, including the environmental officers, and simply asked them what were the pros and cons. I said, looking at Kennard Street, putting bikes down that street, where the bus depot is, didn't seem like a good idea to me. They admitted
that certainly the option that is being looked at, at the moment, was far more appropriate.


So answer to question one and two, I think, Councillor JOHNSTON, on your list, I was the one who put in place, or in progress, the possible change to the design of that bikeway.


Madam Chairman, at that point, I wrote to Councillor JOHNSTON and in fact I think it was—I haven't got the exact timing. But Councillor JOHNSTON—yes, I did write to her and asked her for her opinion. Of course, that didn't happen. There was no opinion expressed by Councillor JOHNSTON.


So it's playing political games to come in here and make out today that we somehow have been not listening to residents and not doing the right thing. She is the local councillor. She should have stepped up and at least discussed with the relevant chairman what her thoughts were. But she won't ever do that because all she wants to do is play political games and use her residents in the
process, Madam Chairman.


Let me read an email that I sent to Councillor JOHNSTON on 26 July. I copied in the acting CEO at the time, Mr Maynard. At that stage, Councillor JOHNSTON wanted a briefing from officers. It came to my attention that she was intending to tape the conversations. That I will never, ever agree to, Madam Chairman.


Councillor JOHNSTON: Point of order, Madam Chairman.


Chairman: Point of order. Councillor JOHNSTON.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

Madam Chairman, this is all fascinating. But I'm not sure how a meeting with council officers in July 2009 actually relates to matters related to community consultation on a bikeway now.


Chairman: This is talking about recognising the need to consult residents in relation to important local projects. Councillor de WIT is talking about that consultation process on this project. Councillor de WIT.


Councillor de WIT:

Thank you, Madam Chairman. Councillor JOHNSTON perhaps needs to go back and read some of the things that she said in her initial speech on this, because the truth has to come out. What has Councillor JOHNSTON's track record been in relation to this bikeway? Well I'll tell you again, Madam Chairman. It has been one of refusing to communicate. That is not the way to help your residents.


So just on this email that I had sent on 26 July, just after she had said she was going to tape the officers' conversation. A few of us know what had been going on prior to that. I said, no, there will be no meeting if you're taping it. So there was further sort of correspondence with the acting CEO.


I said, “Dear Councillor JOHNSTON, I have discussed the issue of the briefing for the Corinda bikeway with the acting CEO. On the proviso that the meeting is not recorded, the acting CEO will arrange a briefing for you with the appropriate officers. As indicated in my earlier email, I would appreciate your thoughts on the proposed route.”


Madam Chairman, you then only have to go—and just to correct Councillor JOHNSTON, it was 2010, not 2009. Then if you wanted to go to the minutes of 3 August last year. This is where there was debate on this matter again. I said, I've looked at that project and council officers have suggested that maybe there is a more appropriate route for a bikeway.


So in a letter that I sent to Councillor JOHNSTON, I asked her to let me know what she thought of these proposals, because there are two, one that comes out of the end of Kennard Street and one that goes further along the creek and comes out what I think is probably a better place in the long-term. So far as I'm concerned, the bridge at the end of Kennard Street is not set in stone. It is open to consultation.


It is open to the opinions of Councillor JOHNSTON, which I have requested and I am waiting on. I have offered to Councillor JOHNSTON that I would like to know her thoughts on the proposal so that we can get to the people out in Tennyson Ward what is the best outcome, not necessarily what we might think.


So I said I'm happy to look at it again, provided Councillor JOHNSTON is prepared to do her bit for the people of Tennyson Ward and that involved initially at least communicating her thoughts with the relevant chairman, who was in a position to do something about it.


So, Madam Chairman, when I say I'm supporting this amendment, we are not going to send council officers to any public meeting. Councillor JOHNSTON, by virtue of what has gone on in the past, the fact that Councillor JOHNSTON has decided, as Councillor SIMMONDS said, to play political stunts and bring this as a motion here. Who did she contact in the organisation to ask for the officers
to come along, Madam Chairman? No. She just decides to try and make it public. So stick it in as a notice of motion.


Madam Chairman, Councillor JOHNSTON is exposed on this. She is exposed for not playing her part, but for trying to use those residents for her political purposes. Madam Chairman, as Councillor SIMMONDS has pointed out, the groups are getting individual consultations in relation to this matter. That gives them a much better opportunity to get their points across, than they would in a
public meeting, which is going to be chaired by a fairly high profile person out of public life, I noticed on the agenda.


Madam Chairman, there is no doubt, in terms of the Kennard Street option, exactly what Councillor SIMMONDS said—and it's over a year since I was there. But I clearly remember this issue. The same thing, that the council officers said, environmentally, Kennard Street is not the right option. It would take a lot more work and a lot more environmental damage to build some sort of connection through there than further down along the creek.


So this is nothing more than a political stunt, Madam Chairman.  Again, I would just ask Councillor JOHNSTON, when she's printing out her Hansard and mining it out, that she sends the whole lot, not just her favourite bit, which is what she likes to do, carefully pick the words that she wants to use, no matter what the issue is, and distort the truth for her own political advantage.


I support the amendment to this motion.


Amendment put:
The Chairman put the motion for the amendment to the Chamber resulting in its being declared carried on the voices.


Councillor JOHNSTON called for a division; however, no division was held as no other councillor requested it.


Debate on substantive motion


The Chairman called for debate on the substantive motion which read:


That this Council recognising the need to consult residents in relation to important local projects, acknowledges that Brisbane City Council officers are currently conducting community consultation, including meeting directly with Corinda residents, environmental and community groups and other relevant stakeholders to provide information, answer questions and seek feedback about the proposed Oxley Creek bikeway.


Chairman: Is there any further debate on the substantive motion?


Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes, Madam Chairman.


Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

I'm delighted to rise and speak on this amended motion. I won't be supporting it.


I think I'll put a few facts on the record too, Councillor de WIT. You might not like them very much.


Councillor de WIT: Point of order, Madam Chairman.


Chairman: Point of order. Councillor de WIT.


Councillor de WIT: I would remind, through you, that Councillor JOHNSTON should address her comments to the chair.


Chairman: Thank you, Councillor de WIT. Same again. Thank you, Councillor JOHNSTON.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

Yes, Madam Chairman. I'm certainly happy to put some facts on the record. Let's start with the first fact, that it is in writing from the CEO of this Council, where Council officers involved in this bikeway project misrepresented my position on this bikeway project—in a report that is published by this Council—at a meeting with Councillor de WIT, Councillor SIMMONDS and a number of other
Council officers. That is a plain fact.


As a result, the CEO of Council has written me a letter—and I will table that next week—apologising for the misrepresentation of my position on this bikeway that was done by the Council officer involved. Both of those matters are plainly on the public record. There's a hard copy of the report. There is also a hard copy of the CEO's letter of apology to me for the misrepresentation.


Now, I'm not providing any further comments into the Chairman of Council because when they were apparently manufactured at a meeting with her and Councillor SIMMONDS over a year ago...


Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON. I think I've probably got your point of order. Councillor JOHNSTON, you are making extreme allegations here that are adversely reflecting on Council officers...


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting.


Chairman: —in this place and are without doubt defamatory against Councillor de WIT and Councillor SIMMONDS. I ask you to withdraw that comment that these representations of yours were manufactured by Councillor SIMMONDS and Councillor de WIT.


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting.


Chairman: Withdraw the comments, Councillor JOHNSTON.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

I withdraw them and I said that. I'll be here next week in general business and I will table the report where it states my position that is untrue. I will also table the letter of apology from the CEO when I wrote to him and raised my concerns about how my position had been misrepresented.


Now, if anyone on that side of the Chamber doubts either of these two things are true, then stand up in this debate and say I'm lying. Call me a liar. Make a Code of Conduct complaint about me. But they're not. They're true. I have attended meetings with Council officers time and time again on this bikeway project. At the first opportunity, my position was misrepresented. Well the CEO has
formally apologised for that. I actually did attend another—


Councillor de WIT: Point of order, Madam Chairman.


Chairman: Point of order. Councillor de WIT.


Councillor de WIT: Would Councillor JOHNSTON take a question?


Chairman: Would you take a question, Councillor JOHNSTON?


Councillor JOHNSTON: No.


Chairman: No, Councillor de WIT.


Councillor JOHNSTON: When Councillor de WIT takes mine, I'll consider taking hers. But she refuses to.


Chairman: Thank you, Councillor JOHNSTON.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

What I will say, Madam Chairman, is that that apology will be made public next week because I don't think it's a reasonable thing, particularly after I'd been in the paper, in the newspaper stating my position publicly, for God's sake. They still misrepresented it in a meeting and a report.


Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, back to the motion, please.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

I'd like to, Madam Chair, but you seemed to give Councillor de WIT extensive leeway to discuss my position.


Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, you are on a warning. Debate my ruling, you are out of here.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

Well, Madam Chairman, let me say, I did meet with Council officers in December last year on the Corinda bikeway project. They attended in my office.


I certainly raised all of these concerns about the bikeway with them at that stage.


The interesting thing that they told me at that point was there would be consultation on the relevant decision about where this bikeway would go. That is the big problem that these residents have. Not only that, most of them have written directly to either this LORD MAYOR or the former LORD MAYOR, asking to be consulted about the location.


Well, Madam Chairman, let me say this again, it's not me. That's their comments that I put on the public record here today that have been so disparaged. They don't think that simply presenting one option is consultation. They want to know why the other options have been ruled out. They want to have proper community discussion about it. They certainly want to be able to have their say.
Now I've made no statements here today that we're not consulting at all, because that's not true. I haven't said that. But what I said is that...


Councillors interjecting.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

What I've said is that these residents deserve a better form of consultation. Let me tell you that a number of them have letters from the LORD MAYOR stating there would be consultation on the location of the bikeway.


The simplest thing I can say in response to this motion is I'll be very happy to make this public. I'll be very happy to show the residents about how their concerns, when they are voiced through their local councillor in this Chamber, are so personally disparaged by Councillor SIMMONDS and Councillor de WIT. I will show them,  through this transcript, that all these people are interested in doing is attacking me personally and not listening to the concerns of
the residents who I am speaking on behalf of.


Now the residents out my way know my position. If your little spies haven't actually gone and picked it up, get out there, get his shoes on and—Chairman:


Councillor JOHNSTON, through the Chair, for the last time, or you'll resume
your seat.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

Well I haven't referred to another councillor. But, Madam Chairman, they need to get their spies out there. They need to get a copy of the publications that I put out. I know many of them are on my distribution list for my e-newsletter. So I know they get that. So any misrepresentation here today that I'm not making my position perfectly public and is not on the record is a downright untruth.


Chairman: Any further debate on the motion? Councillor SIMMONDS.


Councillor SIMMONDS:

Madam Chairman, just quickly, because I want the record to be very clear in what is happening today. We are currently in a community consultation process concerning the route that this bikeway is taking, Madam Chairman.


For any residents who are concerned, who are reading this Hansard, I can say that this consultation is all about the route that the bikeway is taking. Do you have concerns about the route? Do you have concerns about where it's crossing the creek? Do you have concerns about where it's going in the park? This is the
opportunity that you have—it's the reason we sent out 6000 brochures, it's the reason that Council officers are holding one-on-one personal meetings with the local residents, so that they can get that feedback, Madam Chairman. Let there be no misrepresentation of that by Councillor JOHNSTON at any stage, because those are the facts, Madam Chairman.


The other point that I'll make, Madam Chairman, to any local residents who are reading this, is that if they had any doubts that they were being poorly represented, Madam Chairman, then those doubts will be gone after hearing that debate.


For a local councillor to tell the administration that the only way we're going to find out her views is by sending out spies, whatever on earth that means, is utterly ridiculous. Every councillor on that side of the Chamber—


Councillor JOHNSTON: Point of order, Madam Chairman.


Chairman: Point of order. Councillor JOHNSTON.


Councillor JOHNSTON: Claim to be misrepresented.


Councillor SIMMONDS:

Madam Chairman, every other councillor on that side of the Chamber, we may be on political sides, different political sides of the fence, Liberal or Labor. But when it comes to getting a better outcome for our local community, we can work together, Madam Chairman.


I will use the example of Councillor GRIFFITHS, who worked very closely with the Chairman and bikeway officers to get a good outcome for Taringa bikeway, Madam Chairman, and with his local environmental groups, including solar lighting, including looking at the route of the bikeway through that forest which is so environmentally important, Madam Chairman.


But that is not possible with Councillor JOHNSTON, Madam Chairman. That is not possible. She cannot state her position to this administration that we can use to get a better outcome for her community. So we are going to go direct to the source. We are going to go directly to the residents, so that they can tell us,
Madam Chairman. Because what you have just heard is that Councillor JOHNSTON refuses to do her job as a local councillor and advocate for her residents.


Councillor JOHNSTON: Point of order, Madam Chairman.


Chairman: Point of order. Councillor JOHNSTON.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

Two points of order. Firstly, Madam Chairman, it is an absolute, absolute character attack, which is inappropriate in this place, an adverse reflection on my character, to say I am refusing to do my job. That is untrue, Madam Chairman.


The second point of misrepresentation is I claim to be misrepresented. I'd appreciate a ruling on both.


Chairman: You really want a ruling on the first one, Councillor JOHNSTON?


Councillor JOHNSTON:

Madam Chairman, again, let me make it clear. Councillor SIMMONDS has stood up and said, and I quote, I am refusing to do my job.


Madam Chairman, that is an adverse reflection upon my character. I would ask, in accordance with your own rulings, that you ask him to withdraw it.



Councillor JOHNSTON, your point of order is not a point of order.


Hereby I rule it as being an act of disorder in this Chamber by interrupting the speech.


DEPUTY MAYOR, motion for eight days, please.


Motion for suspension of Councillor JOHNSTON:


The DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER moved, seconded by Councillor SIMMONDS, that Councillor JOHNSTON be suspended from the service of Council for a period of eight days.


Upon being submitted to the meeting the motion was declared carried on the voices.


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting


Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON.


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting.


Chairman: There is a very clear—


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting.


Chairman: —legislative complaints process.


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting.


Chairman: I ask you to remove yourself—


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting.


Chairman: —from the Chamber.


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting.


Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, in Hansard last week—


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting.


Chairman: —I made it very clear—


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting:


Chairman: I made it very clear in the Hansard last week that there are only three reasons—


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting.


Chairman: —that you make a point of order.


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting.


Chairman: [Unclear].


Councillor JOHNSTON:

—a valid point of order. It is a valid point of order, to claim that there has been an adverse reflection upon your character. You're saying that that is not a point of order. Is that correct?

Chairman: Points of order are for breach for rules, act of disorder or to ask a question.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

It is a breach of the rules. It is a ruling that you have made as the Chairman of this Council.


Chairman: It is not a breach.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

It is a breach of the rules. You have made the ruling, as the Chairman of this Council. I will be going to get the ruling, get the ruling, the minute I leave here.


You cannot throw someone out for making a point of order.


Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON—


DEPUTY MAYOR: Point of order, Madam Chair.

 Chairman: —your point of order—I'll just clarify because then she'll be leaving the Chamber. I will just clarify that your point of order, you believe that Councillor SIMMONDS was not telling the truth—


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting.


Chairman: —and therefore was adversely—


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting.


DEPUTY MAYOR: Point of order, Madam Chairman.


Chairman: Point of order. DEPUTY MAYOR.


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting.



Madam Chairman, this matter has been dealt with. I don't know why there's a debate still occurring. Councillor JOHNSTON has been asked to leave the Chamber. It has been resolved.



Councillor JOHNSTON, you have made it very clear. I have been instructed by the legal advice in previous rulings that there is no such act of disorder for adversely reflecting on a councillor's character. It is on a Council officer's character.


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting.


Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON.


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting.



Part 4, maintenance of good order, Meetings Local Law 21(1)(c), character or motives. You were saying that Councillor SIMMONDS was making untruths. It was not a breach of the rule for him to be saying things that you did not believe in.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

I wasn't saying that. That is the problem, that you have said something and ruled on something that did not occur. What rule is it?

Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, we have legislated procedures for complaints. I said last week we are not going to be debating—


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting.


Chairman: —[unclear] over technicalities.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

I will not leave. [Unclear] under the rules of this place that you have repeatedly, week in and week out, upheld. You have said in your own words tonight something that I did not say.


Chairman: You stood up to debate Councillor SIMMONDS. You do not—


Councillor JOHNSTON:

I stood up on a point of order and claimed that he had made an adverse reflection upon my character.



That was not the exact words you said. It was not a point of order. It was not a correct point of order that you made. I am ruling from my very clear rulings, for the same reason that Councillor SUTTON is not in the Chamber for eight days.


If you interrupt this meeting with incorrect points of order, it will be seen as an act of disorder. Councillor JOHNSTON, remove yourself from the Chamber.


Councillor JOHNSTON: A point of order that is based on your rulings that you have made repeatedly in this place.


Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON.


Councillor JOHNSTON:

It is. It is a form of intimidation and bullying what you are doing and I will not leave.


Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON.


Councillor JOHNSTON: I will not leave. I made a valid point of order. I will not leave.


Chairman: Your first point of order was not valid.


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting.


Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON.


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting.


Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON.


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting.



Councillor JOHNSTON, I do not appreciate the screaming, intimidating, bullying, harassing tactics that you are using in this Chamber at this time.


Councillor JOHNSTON: I try to debate in this place. I have made—


Chairman: You did not—


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting.


Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, I would like to make a reply to your screaming, harassing statements.


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting.


Chairman: You did not—


Councillor JOHNSTON:

It is really clear that there is a valid point of order here that could have been raised. You're entitled to rule. But you are not entitled to—



Councillor JOHNSTON, you did not mention adversely reflecting character until you reiterated your point of order. In your first point of order, it was an incorrect point of order. Your first point of order will show on the Hansard that it was not a correct point of order. You re-verified what you said to make it sound like a correct point of order. But my ruling was made. Remove yourself from the Chambers.


Councillors will show respect and professionalism in these Chambers. I will be calling rules and ruling points of order incorrect and ruling incorrect points of order as acts of disorder. Clearly said in Hansard last week, said again tonight.


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting.


Councillor de WIT: Point of order, Madam Chairman.


Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting.


Chairman: Point of order. Councillor de WIT.


Councillor de WIT: Madam Chairman, if I could just ask for a point of clarification.


Chairman: Yes. A question, Councillor.


Councillor de WIT:

Yes. The question is I understood, is it that councillor did not agree with the councillor's claim about the statement reflecting adversely and it was really a case that Councillor JOHNSTON refuses to accept the Chair's ruling. Is that what has happened here? Can you—



In the first point of order, Councillor de WIT, Councillor JOHNSTON did not agree with Councillor SIMMONDS' argument. She said it was untrue and misrepresenting. Then she claimed a point to be misrepresented. When I asked, did you truly want me to rule on the first point, she said, yes. She reiterated the point of order which was different the second time, character reversing. If she'd
said it right the first time, Councillor JOHNSTON. You were debating in the first point of order. The CEO is on his way. I ask Councillor JOHNSTON to leave the Chambers.


Councillor JOHNSTON, you were on a warning. Then you used a point of order to debate within a motion. I ruled that is an incorrect point of order and an act of disorder. I suspended you from the service of Council for eight days. You have refused to obey my direction to leave the Chamber. I will now call upon the Chief Executive Office, acting Chief Executive Officer, to remove you from the Chamber. Mr Rule, acting Chief Executive Officer, I authorise you to remove the councillor from the Chamber.


Mr Peter Rule, Executive Manager of the Office of the Lord Mayor and the Chief Executive, as authorised officer, enters the chamber.

Peter Rule:

Councillor JOHNSTON, you have been lawfully directed by the Chairman to leave this meeting and you have failed to comply with that direction. I have been authorised by the Chairman to remove you from the Chamber. Councillor, before directing you to leave the Chamber, I would like to ask you to voluntary leave the Chamber. Councillor, I'll ask you again. Will you please leave the Chamber?


Councillor JOHNSTON, will you please voluntarily leave the Chamber? I take it that you do not intend to respond to my voluntary request. Councillor, I now direct you to leave the Chamber. Councillor, again, I direct you to leave the Chamber. Councillor, I direct you to leave the Chamber.


Councillor, as you have not responded to me, you have failed to comply with my direction. Councillor, I hereby warn you that I fully intend to remove you from the Chamber as directed by the Chairman. If you continue to fail to comply with this direction, you will be obstructing me in the course of the fulfilments of my duties and thereby committing an offence under section 148 of the City of
Brisbane Act 2010. Councillor, will you leave the Chamber?


I take it that you do not intend to comply. As you failed to comply with my direction, accordingly I have called upon the Queensland Police Service to eject you from the Chamber. Councillor, I will now also give consideration to seeking to have you prosecuted for breach of section 148 of the City of Brisbane Act 2010.


Peter Rule:

Councillor JOHNSTON, I have been asked by the Chairman to ask you again would you please voluntarily leave the Chamber? Will you please leave the Chamber? I'll take that response as a refusal, Councillor JOHNSTON.


Chairman: DEPUTY MAYOR, can I have a motion for adjournment, please.


At that point, it was resolved on the motion of the DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, seconded by Councillor Andrew WINES, that the meeting adjourn, to commence only when all councillors have vacated the chamber and the doors have been locked.


Chairman: I will ring the bells when the meeting recommences.


Council stood adjourned at 6.35pm.


Following Councillor JOHNSTON’s failure to follow the Executive Manager’s direction to leave the chamber, the Queensland Police Service (QPS) was called. QPS officers then arrived and were asked to remove Councillor JOHNSTON from the chamber. As Councillor JOHNSTON refused the QPS officer’s request to leave the chamber, the meeting was resumed.



Chairman: Councillor SIMMONDS, any further debate on the substantive motion?

Councillor SIMMONDS: Not at this stage, Madam Chairman.


Motion put


As there was no further debate, the Chairman submitted the motion to the Chamber and it was declared carried on the voices.

John Nightingale
Last seen: 2 years 5 months ago
Joined: 03/03/2010 - 1:04pm
Email to Cr Julian Simmonds

Dear Councillor Simmonds,
I have read with interest the minutes of Council on the above matter.
I would like you to respond to a number of questions about your statements to Council that were, of course, not challenged by any Councillor.
1. You state that public meetings are not a useful means of communication with constituents. If that is the case, why does Council continue with its Neighbourhood Planning scheme, in which public meetings are used extensively? Why is it that Council held a number of public meetings at Corinda Municipal Library when the bus depot was under discussion? Why did Council attend meetings in St Lucia to discuss the St Lucia Bikeway, since completed, at which then Councillor Prentice and the bikeway planning team defended their alternatives, one of which I attended and enjoyed the robust but respectful exchange of views? The outcome of this process was significant change to Council's plans and a reduction of opposition from residents, albeit at cost to the greenspace swallowed up by the concrete. Both the bus depot and St Lucia bikeway meetings were expected to be hostile to Council's plans. Perhaps it is policy that Council officers only attend meetings called and managed by Council, as if your officers were unable to cope with other situations. In any case, I would like you to demonstrate that your comments about why council officers would not attend a public meeting are not simply an ad hoc excuse in this particular case.
2. I attended a meeting of your planning team with OCCA. Could you explain why the reasons given to us for choosing Nosworthy Park did not include Councillor De Wit's comment to Council, which appears to be conclusive? This conclusive reason, "I said looking at Kennard Street, putting bikes down that street where the bus depot is didn't seem like a real good idea to me." The Councillor should have recalled that Council has promised that there will be no entrances of any kind to the bus depot from the Railway Tce or Corinda side. Why then is 'that street where the bus depot is' of any relevance? There are no buses and no employees' cars! Or does Councillor de Wit have information that has not been made available to the residents of Corinda? It appears that it is either Councillor de Witless or a sinister plot. Which is it?
3. Finally, Councillor Simmonds, you hold up your LNP candidate, Matt Brodie with the following words: ' Matt Brodie, for example, springs to mind who is dedicated to proper consultation, Madam Chairman.' I, and a number of others who have mentioned this, have requested information from your candidate, to which no reply has come at all, not even a bland piece of party propaganda. Doe this mean that 'proper consultation' to you, means 'no consultation whatever?
I remain, eager to be convinced of Council's good intentions toward Nosworthy Park and the Common,
John Nightingale

Marie Hollingworth
Last seen: 7 years 6 months ago
Joined: 21/10/2011 - 11:37pm
Letter to Cr Julian Simmonds

Dear Cr Simmonds
Re: Minutes relating to Oxley Creek Bikeway Stage II
I read with interest your references to the Council Officers on the Bikeway Team having a series of consultations with individuals in the community. What you neglected to say was that only those who contacted the Team were graced with a consultation. How were the rest of the community to become informed of the details of the proposed plan? This is the reason the Bikeway Team were invited to address the community at the meeting held on 16th November.
Will you then please make public the minuted consultations held at these individual meetings with community members so that this consultation process is suitably transparent.
Cr Simmonds, had you attended the Community Meeting on November 16th you would have been surprised to find that far from being dominated by a ‘loud voice’ or antagonism (what does it say that this is your expected response/experience?) – you would have heard many sensible and thought out proposals but that no one of the 75 interested locals attending spoke in favour of this plan. You would have heard many options worthy of consideration put forward and several professionals with relevant expertise giving informed proposals. These have been sent in to the Bikeway Team.
Of significance the opinion of all cyclists who spoke was that this path would not be used – it is in the WRONG PLACE.
I ask that you re-consider that ‘preliminary plan’ for one of the proposals submitted to the Bikeway Team that will be useful to the community.
I regret that your Council officers feel ‘threatened’ when attending meetings called for ‘Community Consultation’ - a quote from my Draft Neighbourhood Plan experience at the Corinda RSL Club a couple of years back – which was truly a threatening experience for we local residents, and sadly repeated repeatedly in this area of late. Could the problem more accurately be attributed to the PROCESS followed by Council and the feeling of POWERLESSNESS it invokes in those subjected to it, because no one appears to be listening to us?
Cr Simmonds you may still not be aware that the community is dissatisfied with the ‘consultation process’ for the reason that although the process boxes are ticked by your teams and condescending letters sent out in response, there is little evidence that influencing of the outcome occurs. What evaluation of your processes is written into your PROCESS? Does it even matter if you get it right?
The community may be consulted
But are their opinions HEARD?
Cr Simmonds, though you consider your Project Team to be doing an excellent job, this is definitely not the community opinion. The proposed plan is poorly conceived in every aspect. It will not meet the purpose for which it is designed - that of continuing north-south connectivity for cyclists. Worse it will be unnecessarily destructive of two valued environmental areas on both sides of Oxley Creek. Neither of these areas should be involved at all. The way the bikepath is proposed to traverse Nosworthy Park is unbelievably unsuitable in every aspect.
If you are satisfied with this plan you should be ashamed. It is evident you have not personally visited the sites or you would see how unsuitable the plan is. If this goes ahead you will be responsible for committing a great environmental and community act of vandalism.
Further, regarding the Lord Mayor’s man, Matt Brodie. Despite written invitations to the community meeting, personal explanations of the issues and offer to show him over the areas involved, to my knowledge he has not ventured to speak one word on the issue. But his silence speaks volumes to a community under threat which expects effective representation.
A knowledge of local values and conditions one would think would be the first consideration for a successful project involving community change. Caring and knowledgeable members of this community have given their opinions in submissions on ways this plan could be redesigned to address the many needs involved.
Cr Simmonds, I ask will you heed the concerns expressed by the community and re-consider the entirety of the plan for the Oxley Creek Bikeway Stage II in favour of a more useful and not environmentally destructive proposal.
The community has spoken
Are you listening?
I wait with considerable expectation to hear that (an undisclosed, but considerable amount of) rate –payers money will not be spent in this way, rather used to contribute to a well-considered project that will be beneficial for this community and those who commute through it.
Yours faithfully
Marie Hollingworth

Miken Biken
Last seen: 6 years 9 months ago
Joined: 29/11/2011 - 9:09pm
My response to bikeway proposal

Oxley Creek Bikeway Stage 2
Brisbane City Council
GPO Box 1434
Brisbane Qld 4001
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am writing to provide invited feedback on the proposed route of the Oxley Creek bikeway Stage 2.
I firstly identify that I am both a commuter and recreational cyclist that was extremely excited to hear a bicycle awareness zone was going to be established literally across the road from where I live. It also will not be a surprise to you that I also support any endeavours to keep cyclist and motor vehicles separated for the benefit of both parties. Thirdly I understand, as described in your Community Newsletter October 2011 that due to the Brisbane City Council decision to build the Sherwood Road bus terminal, the required signals and minor footpath reconfiguration of Sherwood Road will now make any cycle path near the terminal both more perilous and impractical for such a heavy traffic area.
I do however have some concerns regarding the proposal. Below are some of the reasons that the proposed route needs further considerations and review:
As a cyclist living on Lynne Grove Ave I currently have two alternatives. I can cycle down to Oxley Road, cross at the lights and by either turning and going under the rail bridge or walking through Corinda Rail Station, I can use the established bike lane that goes from Oxley to Chelmer. The second option for me is use the proposed short bicycle awareness zone proposed until I must then travel outside of this to the end of Clara Street, turn right for two houses until I then travel under the rail line and come out in Jephson Street, go right until the end and get to Sherwood Road. Currently I can traverse all suburbs between Oxley to Chelmer, crossing at pedestrian crossings or traffic lights, travelling a steady pace of my choosing on quiet streets.
If going to the City I can choose to use the Jack Pesch Bridge at Chelmer or connect to street next to the Sherwood Cemetery off Sherwood Road (Egmont Road) and join up with established bike paths through to Tennyson Tennis Centre, Yeerongpilly, The Corso, Eleanor Schonell Bridge etc. If going to the Brisbane Markets or further along (as I did for one year completing study at the Nathan Campus of Griffith University) I am better off walking or driving on Sherwood Road as the dust from both current building works (guess what bus terminal this is?), vehicle movement and continuing open piles of dirt on the shoulder of Sherwood Road between the bridge and Markets pollute the air so much, that it is a dust haze most days, preventing proper vision or safety for cyclists.
What I hope the above identifies is that I agree that there is a need to have a public access point to the Markets over Oxley Creek but please do not refer to it as an sought after addition to cycling infrastructure. There is ample cycling infrastructure away from the dusty uneven Sherwood Road and the few cyclists who do use this road do so with severe reluctance. Rather, the prior inattention of Brisbane City Council to provide proper roadwork upgrades of Sherwood Road and the decision to build a contentious bus terminal should be held into account, to mitigate the changes imposed on Sherwood Road that now make it more perilous and impractical for cyclists.
In addition what is the purpose of providing a bike path in an area with gate locked at the front of Oxley Common in the evening and not open early mornings (i.e. early mornings being a high cyclist use period)? There also is no connected bike path near Oxley Common so that cyclist can enjoying eating dust on an uneven, frequently windy road until they reach a new bike lane, near the Markets, which are only open to the public 2 times a week (Wednesday evenings and Sundays). Some cyclists may be fanatical about such shopping but most try and avoid carrying excessive loads whilst travelling on or near main roads. I also wonder how many trips are done by a cyclist looking for trinkets and other market wears, twice a week along Sherwood Road?
In fairness I must recognise that there is more at stake here than issues of cycling. Put simply if the Kennard Road bridge proposal was deemed to cause greater environmental impacts than the proposed route, there needs to be a review of how this was reached.
Putting aside the fact that the Brisbane City Council can approve itself to construct a large commercial operation and fuel storage area in close proximity to Oxley Creek on the adjacent site at the end of Kennard Road and that Kennard Road has only in recent years been sealed to include a flood prone housing estate approved by the Brisbane City Council, the environmental impacts of the proposed route needs also to be considered. The environmental damage of constructing and concreting through Nosworthy Park, behind houses, down and then up a sharp incline and over a long path on the Oxley Common to the end of Stage2A must be greater than simply placing a higher bridge at the end of Kennard Road to link into the end of Stage 2A.
The bus terminus site was raised higher for flood mitigation of this site, why can’t the proposed bike bridge path use the edge of the bus terminus that is allocated as a buffer zone with trees etc? This may be the suggested Brisbane City Council’s opportunity to mitigate the changes imposed on Sherwood Road that now makes this road more perilous and impractical for cyclists.
If the flood height issue relate to the Oxley Common area, I refer you to the Eleanor Schonell Bridge construction or Tennyson Tennis Centre where very steep inclines were reduced in steepness by segmenting the inclines in a slighter incline S fashion. The length of the path may be longer but the impacts of building paths in one area must be environmentally better than placing construction and new infrastructure impacts over an extended area, which is a highly valued local community environment.
To add to this, given the predicted bike use of the area, why not make it a pedestrian bridge with bollards so that cyclist must dismount. This was a Brisbane City Council determination in 2010 of being appropriate best practice in the City CBD when the city bike path at the northern end of the city to New Farm was deemed unsuitable due to a developer not building the bike path correctly.
If length of bridge is an issue I refer you the current expansion of the Bicentennial bikeway and recently approved rebuilding of the path along the Brisbane River between New Farm and the City CBD. Surely if you can build a bikeway and pedestrian path along an extended length of the Brisbane River, there is an engineering and environmental methodology that can reduce it down to a bridge or pathway over Oxley Creek.
Put simply by using current road infrastructure, extending the bike awareness zone to Railway Terrace and Kennard Road and building a pedestrian bridge will serve a greater purpose with increased local community support.
You will note that I have not identified the specific impacts on specific areas such as Nosworthy Park or Oxley Common but I will leave that to the community interest groups. What I will identify is my concern that the environmental impacts of many areas of interests somehow is less than the identified “greater environmental impacts” on Kennard Road and the expectation that the community will simply say that correct without any detail on how this was determined.
Overall I believe that true value comes from true benefit to those who most use a public access portal. A simple pedestrian bridge, where cyclist must walk a short distance, would be a higher user target group than a cyclist bridge and gain larger community support. A Kennard Road entry point or the identified end of Stage2A point may pose environmental and engineering concerns but the Brisbane City Council seem to be able to be creative and proactive in far more complex environmental and engineering concerns and gain productive outcomes.
I hope that some consideration is afforded to my and other feedback regarding this Oxley Creek proposal with reference to the community and overall impacts of the proposal in its current form. I urge a review of this proposal on the basis of the unspecified difference of impacts on identified areas, the lack of community and local environment support and predicted lack of cyclist use due to the current state of some of Sherwood Road and changes imposed on Sherwood Road due to the Sherwood Bus terminus that now make it more perilous and impractical for cyclists

Log in or register to post comments