Justin Ham, Colivy appeal Gympie council rejection of Mothar Mountain plan

The developers behind a rejected plan to subdivide 41ha of land near the Mothar Mountain Speedway are headed to court.

The developers behind a rejected proposal to open a subdivision at Mothar Mountain are taking the Gympie Council to court in an effort to overturn the decision.

The developers behind a rejected proposal to subdivide 41ha of land near the Gympie Speedway at Mothar Mountain are taking the council to court in an effort to overturn the decision.

Justin Ham and Colivy Pty Ltd are appealing Gympie Regional Council’s refusal of the project proposed for Noosa Rd, about 1km from the Mothar Mountain Speedway.

The plans were turned down by the council’s Planning Department in September 2024.

The department cited multiple issues with the Noosa Rd proposal, including exposure risks from natural hazards including landslips, bushfire and flooding.

Noise from the speedway and nearby Gympie Bypass, which opened on October 16, were also concerns.

In their appeal, Mr Ham and Colivy said the council’s decision was “erroneous” as the proposal complied with planning scheme requirements.

In their appeal, developer Justin Ham and Colivy said the Gympie Council’s decision was “erroneous” as the Noosa Rd proposal complied with planning scheme requirements.

They argued the lot sizes ranged from 4000m sq to 1.7ha, preserved “the existing character of the area” and would provides housing in a location where people could enjoy a semi-rural lifestyle.

No instability was identified in the land, and there was a “low risk” of any instability developing, they said.

Any environmental impact on bushland for “priority species” would be offset by the dedication of about 18ha of land to the council as park reserve, and proposed revegetation would increase koala habitat trees.

They said there were “appropriate” conditions that could be imposed to ensure it was not a problem for residents.

Similar rules could be imposed to ensure impact of flooding on the subdivision, which was located in an identified flood zone, was minimised, and the block’s designs included appropriate buffers and setbacks for bushfire protection, they said.

“There is planning, community, and economic need” for the subdivision, they said.