Page 8 - NLN Dec18
P. 8
JOIN US
FB: SaveNorthLakesGolfCourse
E: savenorthlakes@gmail.com
LOCAL VOICE: Save North Lakes Golf Course
Local resident Phillip Carlson’s second address to Moreton Bay Regional
Council on the sale of the North Lakes Resort Golf Club.
When I spoke last, Save North Lakes Golf Club Inc.(hereafter going to go against a recent unanimous decision of the Court
‘SNLGC’), on behalf of its more than 4,500 members, requested of Appeal; and VRG will then have to go to the Court of Appeal
Council to issue a public statement denouncing any developer’s in the hope that the court has changed its opinion. This option
ability to re-zone the Open Space precinct on which the golf will be extremely expensive as Council will be required to spend
course sits on part. SNLGC asked for this because we were money assessing a DA which it should know is prohibited and
(and remain) of the opinion that the Mango Hill Infrastructure then spend more money fighting the battle in not one but two
Development Control Plan (hereafter ‘the MHIDCP’) is a courts. These exorbitant expenses are borne by all the ratepayers
document that brings clarity to land owners about what can be of Moreton Bay.
built around them within the suburb of North Lakes.
The second option is considerably different and costs very little.
On 12 October 2018, the Queensland Court of Appeal Council can decide to advise any and all developers who want
unanimously reached the same conclusion as SNLGC in the to develop in the Open Space precinct of North Lakes that it will
matter of Springfield Lakes Land Corporation Pty Limited v not accept any DA that is for a prohibited development. Council
Cherish Enterprises Pty Ltd and Ipswich City Council [2018] QCA has every legal right to take this action and the Court of Appeal
266 (hereafter ‘the decision’). This decision confirms that North as well as the current and past Queensland planning legislation
Lakes and its very detailed planning system are not like any confirm this. If Council adopted this course of action there
other area in the Moreton Bay region and careful consideration could be no mention of actual or perceived bias by Council as
needs to be given to any planning applications moving forward. all developers would be treated exactly the same – the process
The decision confirms the interplay of the myriad of current and would be entirely open and transparent.
past Queensland planning legislation and how, the only three
Development Control Plans (hereafter ‘DCP’) which have been Accordingly, SNLGC again requests Council to issue a public
specifically retained by the Queensland Planning Act 2016, are statement to all developers who are considering developing
to be interpreted. The decision confirms that the wording of the outside of the requirements of the MHIDCP on North Lakes’ Open
legislation is ‘grammatically correct’ and ‘unambiguous’ which Space precinct – DO NOT waste your time or money as there is
significantly limits how a DCP can be interpreted. Further, the no ‘right’ for any developer, including what has been proposed
decision confirms that if there is any inconsistency between a by VRG, to lodge a DA for prohibited development in the Open
DCP and the planning scheme that adopted it, the DCP takes Space Precinct of North Lakes.
precedent. Lastly and most importantly the decision confirmed
that the Ipswich City Council was wholly correct in refusing to I accept that Council will choose which path it will adopt. It
even accept a Development Application (hereafter ‘DA’) for will be noted going forward though, that today, Council was
something that was prohibited by its DCP. informed that it has every legal right to refuse to accept a DA for
a prohibited development.
SNLGC are of the opinion that Council has only two options
available to it in regards to the proposed development by Village Lastly, I would like to say that a public statement made by Council
Retirement Group (hereafter ‘VRG’): would greatly assist the North Lakes community by restoring the
planning certainty that ought to be unquestionable.
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.
To join the discussion and keep up to date with our
Community Action activities, visit
The first option will result in ONLY one outcome. VRG will appeal
Council’s decision to the Planning and Environment Court; https://www.facebook.com/SaveNorthLakesGolfCourse/
VRG will most undoubtedly lose because the lower court is not