Boom Town lessons learnt locating
Workers Accommodation and their
legacy infrastructure
Tegan McDonald
Gladstone Regional Council
Development Services Department
Planning Services Section
0
Document Set ID: 3579590
Version: 1, Version Date: 14/10/2016
Abstract
Central Queensland, and specifically the Gladstone Region, is now witnessing the movement of
several significant industrial projects from their construction through to operational phases. From
the early 2000's, the region has been a hub for multi-billion dollar projects based around mining,
industry and port operations. The concurrent construction of these projects brought about a
significant social, economic and environmental challenge - how to best locate and accommodate
over 10,000 workers expected to descend on a locality of approximately 55,000 in a very short
period of time.
The timing for the most significant of those projects, four LNG plants on Curtis Island, also
coincided with the announcement of the amalgamation of the former Calliope Shire Council,
Miriam Vale Shire Council and Gladstone City Council into the now Gladstone Regional Council in
late 2007. The consideration of these projects, and their associated workforce, now had to be
considered in a brand new 'regional' context with difference in positons of former LG areas and
their Planning Schemes.
With construction commencing before on site workers accommodation was operational, Council
had to make a decision on the location of workers accommodation on the 'mainland'. In an attempt
to protect the local community, the determination was made that these mainland camps were best
located in rural locations, serviced by major transport corridors on the proviso that the camps were
temporary in nature and removed in their entirety when operation ceased. This was also in response
to community pressures and expectations on the accommodation of thousands of workers.
Flash forward to 2016 and the projects are now operational and the majority of workers all but
gone, few choosing to stay in a region where they may have never have truly integrated. The
mainland workers camps are mostly empty and several are being decommissioned for the sites to
return back to rural grazing land. Reflecting on this, we consider whether there were social and/or
economic opportunities that the community may have missed in locating these facilities outside of
the urban footprint.
This Masterclass will analyse the Gladstone experience in catering for an influx of over 10,000
workers over a 4 year period. It will present some of the reasoning behind some crucial decisions,
both good and bad, in the location and type of Workers Accommodation and the lessons learnt
from these decisions. Key outcomes are based upon the need to foster a sense of community
between residents and workers in industry and mining based towns and the recognition of the
opportunities for beneficial legacy infrastructure in the right place at the right time.
1
Document Set ID: 3579590
Version: 1, Version Date: 14/10/2016
Introduction
For many regional towns within Queensland and throughout Australia, ongoing mining and
industrial projects are the anchor point that the community often depends on to sustain and grow.
This has historically been the case in Gladstone, Queensland, given the natural deep water harbour,
proximity to key resource chains and accessibility via various modes of transport. Whilst the region
has experienced numerous industrial and mining based projects over time, none to date have had
such a significant impact as did the recent industrial boom, heralded by the Coordinator General's
approval of four Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) processing plants on Curtis Island in the early
2010's (Table One). These approvals, combined with approximately seven other State significant
'Coordinated Projects' approved between 2007-2013 (Table One) within the immediate Gladstone
region, contributed to the demand for an estimated 10,000 construction workers over the
construction life of these projects, at one time (Table One).
These projects were also occurring at a time when Local Government reform in Queensland as a
result of the Local Government Reform Commission saw the amalgamation of the previous
Calliope Shire, Gladstone City and Miriam Vale Shire Councils into the Gladstone Regional Council
in March 2008 (Local Government Reform Commission 2007). Now considering the impending
projects from a regional context, as well as identifying this period as potentially the biggest
consolidated industrial construction in Queensland, the Gladstone Regional Council had to make
some snap key decisions on how best to consider and mitigate these impacts on the community.
Compounding pressure from external sources such as developers and all tiers of Government,
combined with community pressure to minimise the impacts of workers economically and socially
resulted in two key determinations; to locate 'Non-resident Workforce Accommodation' within
rural areas on the proviso they were temporary only, and to bring residential land and permanent
accommodation to market to encourage longer term investment in the region.
As the projects began to 'ramp up' to full construction and the impacts were resonating within the
region, the opportunities for reflection were scarce. Housing and residential land became a major
commodity with exponential growth in prices as demand for housing and land far exceeded supply
despite numerous Development Approvals issued (Gladstone Regional Council 2016 page 5). Social
issues became apparent as a clear divide opened between 'locals' and 'workers' partly due to their
isolation physically from the urban area and the financial strain placed on comparably lower socio
economic families.
However as these projects reached their operational phases, the region was catapulted into an
economic downturn as non-resident workers leave the region, leaving little legacy infrastructure and
2
Document Set ID: 3579590
Version: 1, Version Date: 14/10/2016
housing vacant, commercial premises empty and the workers camps unfilled. A stocktake and
evaluation of the decisions made by all regulators must be prioritised to recognise the longer term
costs and benefits in those decisions. Where is the best place to locate Non-resident Workforce
Accommodation within regional areas? Does the physical location of transient workers effect their
integration into the existing community? Should non-resident workers be located within the urban
footprint and the buildings repurposed after they have served their initial use? Should the term
'Non-resident Workforce Accommodation' be removed from our Planning considerations as only
ever being temporary?
It is important to note that many of these lessons are anecdotal and specific to the Gladstone
region only. There is very little academic literature which evaluates and compares the social,
economic and environmental impacts in locating Non-Resident Workforce Accommodation in
rural or urban contexts. Nor has there been particular academic assessment of the situation in
Gladstone specifically in the wake of several concurrent major industrial projects. Therefore
anecdotally only, there are clear lessons to be learnt in the context of accommodating non-resident
construction workers, in light of the Gladstone Boom Town experience, and lessons that should be
shared across the planning profession. However, this does not preclude the importance of further
academic consideration and evaluation on the influx and outflow of large non-resident workforces
on regional towns.
Gladstone's Industrial Relationship with Workers Accommodation
Industrial and port based industries have long been the driving force behind growth within the
Gladstone region. This was the key defining factor in Gladstone's initial formation given the
location and access to the natural deep water harbour of Port Curtis allowed for a stable population
to be established, as well as aligned future growth and development with the establishment of large
industrial projects.
Major projects over time have included; Queensland Alumina Limited (1967), NRG Power Station
(1969), Awoonga Dam (1979), Cement Australia (1981), Boyne Smelter Limited (1982 and
expanded in 1997), Orica (1990), Rio Tinto Alcan Yarwun (2004) amongst various expansions to
the Port of Gladstone since its formal creation. These previous projects all required significant
numbers of construction workers, one of the largest being a workforce of 2,800 required for the
construction of QAL in the late 1960's (Queensland Alumina Limited 2016).
Historically, the location of construction workers for these major industrial projects was often in
purpose built residential dwellings and temporary camps rather than permanent Non-resident
Workforce Accommodation. The most typical approach was the use of existing and/or
3
Document Set ID: 3579590
Version: 1, Version Date: 14/10/2016
establishment of new caravan parks which could grow and shrink according to the relevant demand
for workers. This resulted in several outcomes once the construction period had finished; new
housing stock, use of local accommodation providers and large, now vacant serviced sites
previously camp sites that were able to be reused. This also meant that given the typical location of
these facilities in the urban area, there was a degree of social integration of the temporary workers
with the permanent residents of the area. Not only that, the likelihood increased that those workers
then considered moving to the region permanently, often choosing to purchase the residential
dwellings built for that purpose. Notwithstanding the above, social and economic impacts still
occurred during the construction period; however there was a tangible benefit to the community
once these projects moved into their operational phases given the above legacy elements.
The following image depicts a single men's camp of approximately 1,000 rooms purpose built for
the QAL construction period on land within the Gladstone city centre in 1964 which was
repurposed for a sports club, motel, fitness centre and playing fields. The image also depicts the
construction of new residential dwellings in the background, also for the construction workforce.
Image Two is the Boles Street Caravan Park which housed approximately 1,200 people during the
QAL construction period in 1969 which was originally repurposed for a drive in movie theatre and
since subdivided for residential housing.
Image One: Single Men's Camp built in 1964 to House QAL Construction Workers at
Barney Point (Source: Queensland Alumina Limited collection)
4
Document Set ID: 3579590
Version: 1, Version Date: 14/10/2016
Image Two: Boles Street Caravan Park in 1969 (Source: Gladstone Regional Art Gallery and
Museum)
Notwithstanding the above, it is important to understand the key differences in the previous
relationship between major projects and Non-resident Workforce Accommodation in the
Gladstone Region and the distinctive political, social and economic circumstances around the 2010
industrial boom that led to a different approach and therefore outcome.
A new Regional Environment
Between the years 2007 and 2013 seven state significant projects were approved in the Gladstone
Region, which predominately related to the LNG industry, but also to the expansion of the Port of
Gladstone. The Environmental Impact Statement process for these projects generally commenced
several years prior, in the mid 2000's. The first major project in the 'boom period' commenced with
the Coordinator General's approval of the first Gladstone Liquefied Natural Gas plant on Curtis
Island and associated infrastructure in May 2010 (Department of State Development 2016). At this
point the population of the Gladstone region was approximately 55,000 people whilst the
combined workforce of the seven major projects that progressed to construction was over 10,000,
as illustrated within the following table. At this time, the LNG proponents expected the
construction workforce to be predominately accommodated on Curtis Island thus having little
impact on the accommodation within the existing region.
5
Document Set ID: 3579590
Version: 1, Version Date: 14/10/2016
Table One: Coordinator General Projects and Expected Workforce as per Environmental
Impact Statements
Concurrently, the Gladstone Regional Council was going through the administration and
processing of the local government amalgamations in March 2008 and establishing the political,
social and environmental positons and priorities of this 'new' local government. This was based
upon a 'buy local & be local' consideration at the time and manifested in a push to employ local
workers where possible in these upcoming projects and minimise the impacts as much as possible
for the existing community. The region was also operating under three separate Planning Schemes
originally prepared by quite different Councils and none of which considered, or were flexible
enough to address the influx of over 10,000 workers and the flow on impacts of these projects
within the Gladstone Region.
Furthermore, the region had been subject to a relatively slow housing market, with the impacts of
the Global Financial Crisis still apparent in the late 2000's (Queensland Government Statistician's
Office 2016 Figure 2). However large tracts of land had been opened up for residential
development by the Gladstone Plan 2006 and the commencement of the construction of an Urban
Sub Arterial road, Kirkwood Road, to the south of Gladstone supported opportunities for
residential expansion (Sinclair Knight Mertz 2004 page 36).
This was the positon of the Gladstone region heading into the commencement of these major
projects. It is essential to consider the regions previous history with major projects combined with
the social and political landscape at the time of approval of the major projects. This assists in
understanding the reasoning behind many of the decisions made, as well as why these results are
now occurring. It also provides clarity on the lessons that can be taken away from the entire event.
6
Document Set ID: 3579590
Version: 1, Version Date: 14/10/2016
The LNG 'Boom' Local Government Approach
As a result of the major project announcements, there was immense flow on effects which directly
impacted on Gladstone Regional Council in almost every facet. However, given the purpose of this
report is to evaluate the location of the Non-Residential Workforce Accommodation and the
positive and negative outcomes these created, this section will focus on the impacts experienced by
the Development Services section of Gladstone Regional Council.
Once the plethora of Environmental Impact Statements were approved by the Coordinator
General's Office with the promise of thousands of workers to the region, pressure mounted very
quickly, as the number of Development Applications lodged to Council increased exponentially
(Gladstone Regional Council 2016 page 5). Several Master Planned estates had already been given
Preliminary approval to the south of Gladstone, as well as Calliope and Tannum Sands, in the early
to mid 2000's resulting in a large land bank of approximately 7,000 residential lots across the three
sub regions, not necessarily as a result of the industrial developments approved by the Coordinator
General. Those developments progressed very quickly to lodging Development Applications for
the initial stages of development to bring lots to market as soon as possible. Political pressure to
push approvals through the Local Government Planning process as fast as possible with as little
conditions as possible was inevitable.
The Scheme's had also increased areas of higher density residential zoning and urban expansion
precincts not previously within the three Planning Schemes current at the time. In a similar trend to
residential lots, the applications for multiple unit dwellings, duplexes, motels and similar residential
accommodation began to stream in for Council approval. There was little requirement in the (then)
relatively new Calliope. Gladstone and Miriam Vale Planning Schemes which required justification
of economic need for certain development types nor was there specific built form design outcomes
specified. As a result, in the years 2010-2014 building approvals issued skyrocketed as units and
dwellings were built in their hundreds (REMPLAN 2016). These units were often poorly designed
aesthetically and inconsistent with the existing character of the areas they were being constructed.
Acknowledging the conditions for the LNG facilities to house the majority of workers on Curtis
Island and the length of the projects being up to 5 years in construction, Council considered that a
portion of the workforce could be accommodated on the mainland. The intent at this point was
twofold, there needed to be some capacity built into the residential market to accommodate
workers while the camps on the island were constructed and by opening up residential
accommodation on the mainland, non-resident workers could be more inclined to relocate to the
region with their families (at least for the construction period). This would also potentially assist in
7
Document Set ID: 3579590
Version: 1, Version Date: 14/10/2016
alleviating possible social issues as non-resident workers had the opportunity to better integrate into
the existing community and social fabric of the region.
Furthermore, given the delays in the LNG projects bringing their 'island' camps online, the pressure
for mainland workers accommodation became greater with twelve applications considered over a
period of six years for various non-residential workforce accommodation, resulting in a full
development capacity for over 6,300 workers (Table Two).
Council considered true 'Workers Accommodation' in a context that was generally guided by the
then Planning Schemes and supported by community opinions; that they should be located in rural
areas, away from the urban footprint but located on main transport corridors. The intent was to
lessen the impacts on the existing communities and to essentially isolate these camps so that they
were entirely self-sufficient in regard to infrastructure. This was also supported by the ability to
then decommission the sites once the use had ceased and convert back to viable rural land with
little to no impacts, socially, environmentally or economically. In comparison, the perceived risks
were seen to be negative impacts to the community and degradation of existing infrastructure if
locating non-residential workforce accommodation within existing urban areas.
As such, in reflecting the now superseded Scheme requirements for Non-Resident Workforce
Accommodation to be located outside of urban areas, eleven of these applications were in rural
locations. The single 'urban' camp approved was adjacent to the Gladstone Airport, however was
never acted upon. The following image depicts the locations of these development sites and their
proximity to the main townships of Calliope and Gladstone.
8
Document Set ID: 3579590
Version: 1, Version Date: 14/10/2016
Map One: Locations of Approved Mainland Non-Resident Workforce Accommodation and
proximity to LNG facilities
The following table consolidates the applications lodged, their approval dates, construction times
and residential capacity.
9
Document Set ID: 3579590
Version: 1, Version Date: 14/10/2016
Table Two: Mainland Non-Resident Workforce Accommodation Development Permits
In brief, Gladstone Regional Council in their consideration of the impending influx of workers had
limited resources to be able to accommodate such a change, particularly when the major projects
themselves were assessed and developed outside of Council's jurisdiction whilst the majority of the
impacts were going to have to be addressed by the local government.
Riding the 'Boom', Holding on for the Crash
Notwithstanding thousands of new lots and dwelling units approved and built, residential housing
was at a premium and affordability became a major social and political issue. To compound this, it
took over 12 months from the commencement of works to begin to bring the three camps on
Curtis Island online (Gladstone Observer 28 November 2012). Furthermore, despite the physical
location of constructed non-resident workforce accommodation outside of the urban footprint, the
existing community was still impacted by the influx of workers and a corresponding increase in
crime and antisocial behaviour with crime statistics showing an increase in the years from 2010 until
2016 (MyPolice Gladstone 2016).
Council and numerous other providers had significant issues in dealing with the impacts on lower
socio-economic families which resulted in many residents unable to afford to live in the region and
having to relocate. The incidents of unlawful structures and uses commencing without relevant
Planning or Building approvals skyrocketed amidst reports of contractors camping in residential
10
Document Set ID: 3579590
Version: 1, Version Date: 14/10/2016
developments that were still under construction and caravan parks far exceeding their approved
capacities.
Affordable housing was unachievable as rental vacancy rates also reached their lowest levels in June
2011 at 0.6% making Gladstone one of the most difficult housing markets in Queensland
(Gladstone Observer 8 February 2016). In response, the LNG proponents, in conjunction with
Council, established the Gladstone Housing Company in an attempt to develop Multiple Units in
well serviced locations. Timing and management proved to be a major issue in achieving the
objectives of the projects spearheaded and the developments struggled through the Development
Application process. To date only two of these projects have been completed in 2014, arguably not
impacting the affordable housing market the company was established to achieve.
Economic Development Queensland (then known as the Urban Land Development Authority or
ULDA) also sought to increase affordable housing options in a region subject to unprecedented
growth pressures as a result of the resource boom (Department of Infrastructure, Local
Government and Planning 2016). In April 2010 the Clinton Priority Development Area (PDA) was
declared, the first Priority Development Area area outside of South East Queensland Department
of Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning 2016). Subsequent to this, in September 2011
the Tannum Sands Priority Development Area was declared and in April 2013 the Toolooa Priority
Development Area was declared in other parts of the Gladstone Region. Whilst the drafting of the
Development Schemes included some consultation with Council and the community, the final
plans of development resulted in minimum and average lot sizes far below that required within any
of the applicable Planning Schemes. The Clinton and Tannum Sands PDA's have subsequently
developed over time, and whilst they have provided a lower cost housing option, there are some
maintenance issues, particularly with the Clinton PDA, that are now being realised.
The LNG construction reached peak workforce in approximately 2014, at this time there was an
estimated 10,000 additional workers in region, with flow on multipliers approximated between 5080% for additional support workforce also within the region. As the projects completed key stages,
the construction workforce also began to 'ramp down' and the housing pressure slowed. The
commissioning of key stages of the LNG construction also coincided with a drop in demand for
key resources and subsequent decline in the resource sector. This in turn has resulted in an exodus
of workers leaving the region at a comparable rate to their original arrival.
The present day Gladstone Region is now a different environment to that of 2010. The 'on island'
Workers Accommodation camps are beginning to be decommissioned and removed. Housing and
rental prices declined dramatically in 2015 and continue to do so. New residential developments
11
Document Set ID: 3579590
Version: 1, Version Date: 14/10/2016
under construction are few and far between with many Development Permits being sub staged,
lapsing or even being cancelled. Mortgagee in possession properties are becoming more common as
properties purchased in the peak are no longer economically viable. Whilst many of these outcomes
have occurred in response to a decline in the resources sector, the impacts on the huge workforce
exodus cannot be ignored. The objective now is to consider what could have been done differently
that may have lessened some of these impacts on the Gladstone Region.
Lessons Learnt
It is again reiterated that regardless of a change in approach, there were unavoidable social and
economic impacts when considering the accommodation of over 10,000 non-resident workers.
Furthermore it is essential to establish that there have been many positive benefits to the region, as
a direct result of the non-resident workforce and associated accommodation. However, there have
been some clear lessons learnt from the Gladstone experience that may be pertinent in the future,
or applied in any region that may experience a similar phenomenon.
The initial consideration is to understand how any region should benefit from a major industrial
project both during and after construction. This is particularly important when dealing with projects
that may be assessed and determined by alternate assessment managers such as the State or Federal
Governments so that the Local Government have a clear and understandable agenda from the
start. This should be reflected within all submissions and discussions with the proponents and
assessors. During the time of the EIS process for the major projects in Gladstone, there were many
other political factors at play, as well as a push for securing local jobs and impacting the current
community as little as possible. Whilst there was nothing explicitly wrong with this approach,
perhaps the GRC missed out on developing the community in a more positive way longer term by
physically locating Non-resident Workforce Accommodation so far from the urban footprint. The
below table details a few of the costs and benefits associated with the physical location of Nonresident Workforce Accommodation, however depending on the specific region and project, there
is not a one size fits all solution.
Table Three: Costs and Benefits in Physical Location of Non-resident Workforce
Accommodation
12
Document Set ID: 3579590
Version: 1, Version Date: 14/10/2016
The central consideration should be what the community seeks to have gained after the project has
completed construction and moved to its operational phase. Essentially what does the project give
back to the community as part of its construction? Does the community want or need legacy
infrastructure beyond that of the project itself; recognising that the most important legacy
infrastructure is not always that which is physically built. Arguably, for most regional areas, it is the
social legacy that is the highest priority. Within the Gladstone Region the focus was always on
prioritising local jobs, but perhaps an outcome of encouraging and attracting non-resident workers
to move to the region permanently should have been better managed. Increasing the permanent
population base during the peak non-resident workforce period, may have resulted in less of an
impact as the projects moved into their operational phase and workers were established in the
region. This may have resulted in fewer impacts to the housing and commercial markets as well as
encouraged future confidence in the economic future of the region.
Whilst it appears simple in hindsight to pose these questions and suggestions, it is understood that
each region and each industrial project is different and will have different positive and negative
impacts. In the Gladstone context, the location and construction of at least one major non-resident
workforce accommodation within proximity to the Gladstone urban area may have resulted in
several potential outcomes:

Increased commercial patronage within the City;

Increased participation within the social fabric of Gladstone;

Increased tolerance of Non-resident Workforce by the existing community;

Less incidents of anti-social behaviour;

Shorter construction timeframe in building the Non-resident Workforce Accommodation
and as such alleviating pressure on the housing market quicker;

Increased likelihood of workers relocating to the region after construction work has
finished;

Establishment of hard legacy infrastructure such as water, sewer and roads due to upgrades
and increased capacity created.
Notwithstanding the above, it is still recognised that with 10,000 non-resident workers descending
onto the community, the short term housing and social pressures would very much have been
evident. However the long term benefits and impacts may well have been different and the
community may have inherited a different social and economic environment.
The Gladstone Region has certainly been part of an enormous social, economic and political
rollercoaster in the last 10 years. The coincidence of several major industrial projects of that scale is
13
Document Set ID: 3579590
Version: 1, Version Date: 14/10/2016
unlikely to occur again. The community now is starting to shift to a different gear as the Gladstone
population reaches a point where the 'boom and bust' cycles may begin to stabilise and we
transition to a 'city' in its own right, with greater resilience. Whilst it may still be several years before
the housing market restabilises, there are positive signs of sustainable growth in the commercial
sector particular already evident.
It may be that the Gladstone community has several years before another major project involving
such high levels of non-resident workers occurs, and therefore some time before the
aforementioned considerations can be applied. It is all the more imperative then that these lessons
are detailed, discussed and investigated in the future, to allow other regions in similar circumstances
to better approach and manage similar experiences.
Conclusion
Given the continued prevalence of large mining and industrial based projects in regional areas and
their general tendency to require high levels of construction workers countered with low levels of
operational staff, the consideration of 'best practice' when assessing Non-resident Workforce
Accommodation is essential. The ultimate objective being to gain legacy infrastructure that is
considered beneficial for the entire community. This can, and should, be different depending on the
specific circumstances of each region or town; from building permanent structures that may be
reused, to attracting some of the workforce as permanent residents to grow the community.
In the Gladstone context, there are benefits that the community has gained from the 'boom' in the
way of built infrastructure, increased housing stock and community programs and initiatives.
However these have also come at a cost, which when dealing with the sheer volume of incoming
workers, was inescapable. Ultimately the experience in itself was of benefit to the community,
developers and Local Government, as the construction of the various projects has reinforced
Gladstone's industrial powerhouse moniker and changed the way accommodation for similar
projects in the future will be considered by all.
Further academic literature needs to be developed to better consider and compare the social,
economic and environmental impacts in locating non-resident workforce accommodation in rural
or urban contexts in both the short and long term life of industrial projects. This should not be
specific to Gladstone, there are numerous other regional areas that have, or are about to, undergo
similar projects at varying scales.
If it is possible to make subjective recommendations to those who may be about to experience a
similar event to that of Gladstone, then it is suggested that the below be considered:
14
Document Set ID: 3579590
Version: 1, Version Date: 14/10/2016

The prioritisation of constructing some Non-resident Workforce Accommodation prior to
the project construction commencing in its entirety.

Engaging the existing community as early as possible to gauge their preferences in regard
to the location of Non-resident Workforce Accommodation as well as the long term
benefits they seek from the project.

Ensuring that any EIS addresses social impacts in a way that is specific and meaningful to
the local community.

Contemplate the benefits in locating Non-resident Workforce Accommodation within the
urban footprint in proximity to key commercial, community and transport hubs.

Consider the benefits in Non-resident Workforce Accommodation being constructed in a
way that can be reused for multiple uses (and ideally community based) once
decommissioned.

Ensure the local Planning instrument is sufficiently robust to consider economic need in
assessing Preliminary Approvals overriding the Planning Scheme, particularly for
residential subdivision.

Ensure the local Planning instrument addresses design and architectural features
particularly in Multiple Dwellings and Short Term Accommodation uses.
In considering the above, it is envisaged that other regional areas can take the best advantage of
these types of events and accommodate an influx of workers appropriately depending on the
specific area, the community and its circumstances.
15
Document Set ID: 3579590
Version: 1, Version Date: 14/10/2016
Bibliography
Gladstone Observer 28 November 2012. Workers Camp with 1700 beds on Curtis Island
Complete, Gladstone Newspaper Company, accessed 25 September 2016
<http://www.gladstoneobserver.com.au/news/worker-camp-complete/1638946/>
Gladstone Observer 8 February 2016. Gladstones Rental Vacancy Rates rise by 3% in 7 Years,
Gladstone Newspaper Company, accessed 25 September 2016
<http://www.gladstoneobserver.com.au/news/gladstones-rental-vacancy-rates-rise-3-7years/2923885/>
Gladstone Regional Council 2016. Development Statistics December 2013, accessed 25 September
2016
<http://www.gladstone.qld.gov.au/documents/1570002/9614034/Development%20Statistics%20
%E2%80%93%20December%202013>
MyPolice Gladstone 2016. Queensland Crime Statistics, Queensland Police Service, accessed 25
September 2016 <http://mypolice.qld.gov.au/gladstone/queensland-crime-statistics/>
MyPolice Gladstone 2016
Queensland Alumina Limited 2016. Our History, Rio Tinto Alcan, accessed 25 September 2016
<http://www.qal.com.au/who-we-are/our-history.aspx>
Queensland Government Statistician's Office 2016. Queensland Treasury, Residential Land
Development Activity Profile - December Quarter, accessed 25 September 2016
<http://www.qgso.qld.gov.au/products/reports/res-land-dwelling-activity-lga/res-land-dwellingactivity-gladstone.pdf >
Queensland State Government 2007. Local Government Reform Commission, Report of the Local
Government Reform Commission, Local government Reform Commission, Brisbane.
Queensland State Government 2016. Gladstone Liquefied Natural Gas Project, Department of
State Development, accessed 25 September 2016
<http://www.statedevelopment.qld.gov.au/assessments-and-approvals/gladstone-liquefiednatural-gas.html>
16
Document Set ID: 3579590
Version: 1, Version Date: 14/10/2016
Queensland State Government 2016.Priority Development Areas, Department of Infrastructure,
Local Government and Planning, accessed 25 September 2016
<http://www.dilgp.qld.gov.au/planning/priority-development-areas/clinton-gladstone.html>
REMPLAN 2016. Gladstone Region Building Approvals 2001-2016, Gladstone Regional Council,
accessed 25 September 2016 <http://www.economicprofile.com.au/gladstone/trends/buildingapprovals>
Sinclair Knight Mertz 2004. Kirkwood Road South Structure Plan, Gladstone Regional Council,
accessed 25 September 2016
<http://tpscheme.gladstonerc.qld.gov.au/formergladstonecity/pdf/gplan2005_sd_structure_plan.
pdf>
17
Document Set ID: 3579590
Version: 1, Version Date: 14/10/2016