Council
12 February, 2025
Appeal over koalas
A developer is appealing a Somerset Council decision to reject a proposed Fernvale housing estate, due to its impact on koala habitat and lot size.
The council rejected an application by United Development Corporation in December 2024, ruling the proposed 121-lot project would have resulted in the loss of 11 hectares of koala habitat, including 2,360 mature koala trees.
But at the end of last month, UDC appealed the decision to the Planning and Environment Court, arguing that its proposal had been specifically designed to avoid, minimise, and mitigate its impact on koala habitat areas.
In its Notice of Appeal, lawyers for UDC stated that 20 per cent of the development area would be retained as koala habitat “or replanted post development to provide future habitat.”
The appeal also argued that the impact of the project was minimal because it was “an isolated area of koala habitat that has limited connectivity which has degraded over time… such that any impacts to koala habitat are not significant.”
Further, it stated that the koala habitat areas “retain limited ecological value for koalas, and the impacts of the proposed development to koala habitat are not significant in that context” and that the project “serves to retain connectivity to the west and north, while at the same time preventing koalas from dangerously traversing the Brisbane Valley Highway.”
Council also had concerns with lot sizes — from 600sqm to 1500sqm — stating it “was not consistent with this zoning.”
In regards to Council’s refusal due to the Planning Scheme conflict, UDC argued the development “complies with relevant provisions,” adding that it complied with Council’s Strategic Framework, which identified that Fernvale offered “the greatest urban growth opportunity,” along with Lowood.
According to UDC, the proposed development complies with this, as it “takes advantage of this urban growth opportunity by providing an appropriate residential development within the urban area of Fernvale.”
UDC argued the project was located within a developing urban area and in proximity to existing educational facilities.
It further argued that it “aligns with community expectations” and “will have no adverse amenity impacts by virtue of including higher density in the areas.”
While Council was directed by the State Assessment and Referral Agency (SARA) to refuse the application, as it conflicts with state mapping for vegetation with significance (koala habitat), Council was also required to assess the application on its merits as part of the relevant legislative process.
UDC is asking the court to “set aside” and replace SARA’s response with “an amended referral agency response, directing the Respondent (Council) to give any approval of the Application subject to relevant and reasonable conditions.”
Over 100 submissions against the DA were received by Council during the public notification period last year, with submitters having been notified they can become co-respondents by election. This means submitters can join the appeal.
Somerset Mayor, Jason Wendt, said it’s recommended submitters seek their own independent legal advice before electing to become a co-respondent, due to the time and cost associated with an appeal.
Cr Wendt also added that Council “stands by its decision” and “intends to defend its position.”
“We have a statutory obligation to uphold the Planning Scheme, but we are always conscious of public interest and the costs associated with court proceedings,” he said.
Somerset Regional Council has entered an appearance with the court via its legal counsel.
