What’s Happening?
Redland City Council has approved the demolition of heritage-listed buildings at 1 and 3 Shore Street East in Cleveland.
The decision followed a public council debate on Wednesday, 14 October 2026, after Division 2 Councillor Peter Mitchell called in the application. Council officers recommended approval after independent assessments found the buildings could not reasonably be repaired and retained.
Although the buildings hold local heritage significance, the approval includes conditions requiring detailed historical documentation to preserve their history.
Why It Matters
The decision highlights the difficulties councils face when protecting heritage-listed buildings that have deteriorated beyond reasonable repair.
Under Redland City’s planning scheme, heritage protection generally favours retaining historically significant properties. However, demolition may be considered when buildings are structurally unsound and cannot reasonably be restored.
Council officers reviewed structural assessments, restoration costs and independent heritage advice before reaching their recommendation. They also commissioned third-party reviews and conducted an internal inspection to assess the buildings’ condition.
Following those assessments, officers concluded the properties were “beyond what could reasonably be considered to be retained”.
Cr Mitchell said he brought the matter before the full council because of its significance to the community. He wanted residents to understand how the application was assessed and why demolition had been recommended.
The public debate also provided an opportunity to examine council’s wider approach to heritage protection, maintenance assistance and compliance.
Local Impact
The buildings have long formed part of Cleveland’s historic streetscape and feature along the area’s local heritage trail.
More recently, the properties housed Shore Studio, an art supplies business and workshop space with connections to the local arts community.
Councillor Paul Bishop, who holds the Arts, Culture and Heritage portfolio, acknowledged their historical and cultural importance. He also recognised that losing the buildings would disappoint residents who had supported their preservation.
While demolition will remove a physical part of Cleveland’s history, council has required archival records to preserve the site’s significance.
These records will become part of the publicly accessible local history collection, allowing residents and future generations to understand the properties’ contribution to Cleveland.
By the Numbers
- 8 to 2: Councillors approved the demolition, with Acting Mayor Julie Talty and Councillor Paul Gollé voting against it. Councillors Wendy Boglary, Peter Mitchell, Lance Hewlett, Shane Rendalls, Rowanne McKenzie, Tracey Huges, Jason Colley and Paul Bishop supported the motion.
- 244 public submissions: The application attracted considerable community interest, reflecting concerns about the future of Cleveland’s heritage buildings.
- Three months: The approval conditions require historical documentation to be submitted within this period, according to Cr Bishop.
Zoom In
Earlier assessments in 2017 had supported retaining the buildings. However, subsequent structural reports and independent heritage reviews raised concerns about whether restoration remained practical.
Cr Bishop explained that relocating the buildings had also been considered. Although relocation could preserve their physical appearance, it would remove them from the historical setting that contributed to their significance.
As a result, the independent heritage advice did not support retaining the buildings, leaving detailed archival documentation as an important condition.
The required records will include photographs, building plans, historical descriptions and information explaining the demolition decision. Council will retain the material in its local history collection, with possible inclusion in the John Oxley Library.
Cr Bishop also encouraged residents to contribute additional historical information, particularly material that could strengthen the public record.
He said preserving digital collections could help future generations better understand Cleveland’s history and the importance of its heritage places.
Zoom Out
Beyond the immediate decision, the debate raised broader concerns about maintaining heritage properties across Redlands Coast.
Cr Bishop stressed that heritage listing alone cannot guarantee a building’s survival, particularly when structural deterioration becomes difficult to reverse.
“Heritage doesn’t come with any guarantees,” he said.
He explained that owners play an important role in protecting historic properties through ongoing maintenance and care.
“The most important thing for heritage properties is to have an owner who understands and cares for that place,” he said.
Meanwhile, Cr Mitchell acknowledged the disappointment surrounding the decision but said the public process demonstrated transparency.
“This will come as a blow to some of the community,” he said.
However, he described the opportunity for public consideration as “a great uplift for democracy”, noting that internal and independent assessments had reached similar conclusions.
Cr Mitchell also confirmed that councillors had discussed possible improvements to heritage assistance and compliance. These discussions were separate from the demolition application but could inform future approaches to protecting historic places.
What To Look For Next?
Meanwhile, the council’s discussions about further heritage assistance and compliance could lead to additional consideration of how historic properties are maintained.
Although no new measures were announced during the meeting, the Cleveland decision has highlighted the importance of addressing heritage maintenance before buildings deteriorate beyond reasonable repair.
Source: General Meeting Oct 14 Redland City Council item 14.3
