Blog

With over four thousand supporters of the group and growing, the Save North Lakes Golf Course movement is gaining broad support from the community with former Pine Rivers Shire Councillor Yvonne Barlow speaking out, giving her support and urging current elected Council officials to look at the decision of the courts on similar issues in other areas around what ‘prohibited use’ of land means.

Yvonne was on the Planning Committee, responsible for creating the Mango Hill Infrastructure Development Control Plan and says the DCP was created in the first place to protect the community for the future.

Watch the interview below.

Resources

You can sign the online petition to Moreton Bay Regional Council here – https://www.change.org/p/moreton-bay-council-save-north-lakes-resort-golf-club-from-sale-to-developers

You can sign the online petition to the Queensland State Government here – https://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/work-of-assembly/petitions/petition-details?id=2977

When I spoke last, Save North Lakes Golf Club Inc.(hereafter ‘SNLGC’), on behalf of its more than 4,500 members, requested Council to issue a public statement denouncing any developer’s ability to re-zone the Open Space precinct on which the golf course sits on part. SNLGC asked for this because we were (and remain) of the opinion that the Mango Hill Infrastructure Development Control Plan (hereafter ‘the MHIDCP’) is a document that brings clarity to land owners about what can be built around them within the suburb of North Lakes.

On 12 October 2018, the Queensland Court of Appeal unanimously reached the same conclusion as SNLGC in the matter of Springfield Lakes Land Corporation Pty Limited v Cherish Enterprises Pty Ltd and Ipswich City Council [2018] QCA 266 (hereafter ‘the decision’). This decision confirms that North Lakes and its very detailed planning system are not like any other area in the Moreton Bay region and careful consideration needs to be given to any planning applications moving forward.

The decision confirms the interplay of the myriad of current and past Queensland planning legislation and how, the only three Development Control Plans (hereafter ‘DCP’) which have been specifically retained by the Queensland Planning Act 2016, are to be interpreted. The decision confirms that the wording of the legislation is ‘grammatically correct’ and ‘unambiguous’ which significantly limits how a DCP can be interpreted. Further, the decision confirms that if there is any inconsistency between a DCP and the planning scheme that adopted it, the DCP takes precedent. Lastly and most importantly the decision confirmed that the Ipswich City Council was wholly correct in refusing to even accept a Development Application (hereafter ‘DA’) for something that was prohibited by its DCP.

SNLGC are of the opinion that Council has only two options available to it in regards to the proposed development by Village Retirement Group (hereafter ‘VRG’):

1. to receive, assess and reject the DA as it is a prohibited development according to the MHIDCP; or
2. to refuse to receive any DA which is a prohibited development according to the MHIDCP.

The first option will result in ONLY one outcome. VRG will appeal Council’s decision to the Planning and Environment Court; VRG will most undoubtedly lose because the lower court is not going to go against a recent unanimous decision of the Court of Appeal; and VRG will then have to go to the Court of Appeal in the hope that the court has changed its opinion. This option will be extremely expensive as Council will be required to spend money assessing a DA which it should know is prohibited and then spend more money fighting the battle in not one but two courts. These exorbitant expenses are borne by all the ratepayers of Moreton Bay.

The second option is considerably different and costs very little. Council can decide to advise any and all developers who want to develop in the Open Space precinct of North Lakes that it will not accept any DA that is for a prohibited development. Council has every legal right to take this action and the Court of Appeal as well as the current and past Queensland planning legislation confirm this. If Council adopted this course of action there could be no mention of actual or perceived bias by Council as all developers would be treated exactly the same – the process would be entirely open and transparent.

Accordingly, SNLGC again requests Council to issue a public statement to all developers who are considering developing outside of the requirements of the MHIDCP on North Lakes’ Open Space precinct – DO NOT waste your time or money as there is no ‘right’ for any developer, including what has been proposed by VRG, to lodge a DA for prohibited development in the Open Space Precinct of North Lakes.

I accept that Council will choose which path it will adopt. It will be noted going forward though, that today, Council was informed that it has every legal right to refuse to accept a DA for a prohibited development.

Lastly, I would like to say that a public statement made by Council would greatly assist the North Lakes community by restoring the planning certainty that ought to be unquestionable.

Phillip Carlson – Save North Lakes Golf Club Inc.

Residents: It’s really simple to Sign the Petition to the State Parliament to show that YOU do not support any change in use of the North Lakes Golf Course and that YOU oppose any development application to change the use of the North Lakes Golf Course.

Visit the following link to sign the Petition – https://www.parliament.qld.gov.au…