YOURIPSWICH.COM BECAUSE ITS YOUR IPSWICH

Artists impressions of the railway theme design of Riverlink 1 development application.

How Many Riverlinks Commercial Village Designs are there?

Riverlink 1(left) RIverlink 2 (right) wharf railway and Heiner Road marked in yellow.
Riverlink 1 Application No. 2328/01 (above)..........................Riverlink 2 Application No.682/03 (above)

Most people that I have talked are totaly confused as to what they have seen in the past and what they will be getting on site.

There have been many variations of the Riverlink design shown to the public. The two designs above are the two official designs submitted to the Ipswich City Council for development approval.

Riverlink 1

(2328/01) was submitted for development approval and public submissions in 2001-2002 (by Wingate Properties) after a fairly comprehensive public concultation period over two years. The design (by Loucas Zahos Architects) (see artwork at top) was sympaphetic to the existing railway heritage and the plan foot print of the buildings only needed minor changes to make it co-exist with the 1864 Wharf Railway and the 1864-65 Heiner Road. The existing heritage was pointed out in a written submission to Ipswich City Council and to the developer. The developer was willing to adjust the design to allow the heritage to co-exist with the new development and the community was happy.

Riverlink 2

(682/03) was submitted for development approval and public submissions in 2003 with little or no public consultation after a major re-design (by a completely different designer Harmony Properties) for a new developer (Leda holdings) in less than 12 months from the last publicaly displayed previous Riverlink 1 design (by Wingate Properties). It was then the intention of the developers to dismantle the abutments and use the stone to make a garden bed out of them. The wharf railway (first in Queensland) is to be buried. Again the importance of the Heritage is pointed out in a detailed written report sent to the Ipswich City Council, Wingate Properties and Harmony Properties (designers to Leda Holdings).

Why the Change in Heart?

The developers have now stated that if they knew of the importance of the heritage earlier that they could have designed it into the new development. Is the general public meant to believe this?

Bear in mind that the developer knew of the Heritage before the design was changed, the Ipswich City Council definately knew and the State Government as owner of the Railway land should have known that this Heritage at the birth place of Queensland Railways was significant. It had been on the Ipswich Heritage Register since 1991 and further more this was brought to their attention in a writen submission to both the Ipswich City Council and the developer in 2002.

This design has been influenced by a number of factors:

The Ipswich City Council's Riverheart Vision
The Queensland Governments selling a large parcel of public riverside parkland to the developer (without a public notification)
A new commercial village developer.
The Heritage significance of the 1864 railway was devalued by the decision makers.

Who are the General Public to Believe?

Ipswich City (the Heritage City) councillors have publicaly stated that they did not know of the Heritage on this site before, and that it is now a state matter as it has been taken out their hands since the State Government Minister for Ddevelopment and Innovation has used his call in powers under the IPA act.
Local State Government representatives who say the same but add that that it was the Ipswich City Council who approved it in the first place.
The developer who has publicaly stated that if they were told early enough that it was important they could have incorporated it into the development.

To Make Matters Worse ?

The Ipswich City Council adopted the RIiverheart Vison (not to be confused with RIverlink) in Septemer 2002, the vision was to embrace the river with new developments on both sides of the river.

The current re-designed Riverlink 2 has a multi storey concrete carpark against the north bank of the Bremer River? (I am sure the cars will be happy with the view). The same concrete carpark will be the backdrop of what the general public will be looking directly at on the north bank of the river from the proposed new multi million dollar public parklands that are to be redeveloped on the south bank as part of the River Heart project..

Can Development and Heritage Co-Exist?

Yes it can, If there is the desire to re-design the new development to co-exist with the existing heritage it can easily be achieved, the designers must be given the correct parameters to work to in order for this to occur. The following alternative sketch design was submitted for discussion purposes.

Alternative design proposed by Phil Nunn to facilitate discussion with regards a partial re-design.

The first Riverlink 1 buildings (above) followed a railway theme in their design and were sympaphetic to the surviving heritage at the birth place of Queensland Rail. The current design does not follow this theme.

You can Help save our heritage:

Download Current Petition and gather as many signatures as possible.

Download Reference Material

The Heiner Road Precinct:

Precinct Overview

Heiner Road

Heiner Road Overbridge

Bremer River Paddle Steamers