Developer sues Gympie council over rejected Rainbow Beach unit complex

A multimillion-dollar coastal development has sparked a legal battle after the council cited bushfire hazards and vegetation clearing as reasons to block the 34-unit project.

The developers behind a rejected plan to build a multi-storey unit complex at Rainbow Beach are taking the Gympie council to court after it said they failed to protect the environment and keep residents safe from bushfires.

The developers behind a rejected plan to build a multistorey unit complex at Rainbow Beach are taking the Gympie council to court after it said they failed to protect the environment and keep residents safe from bushfires.

Altum Rainbow unveiled its plans to open the 34-unit complex at the coastal town in May, little more than a year after it bought the Wyvern Rd block for $3.35m.

It planned to bulldoze existing beach homes on the land to build the unit complex, which would have included a three-storey apartment building, five two-storey townhouses, a gym, and a pool.

The plans were rejected by the council’s Planning Department under delegation on October 22.

In its refusal notice, the council said the plan conflicted with the planning scheme, including bushfire and environment conservation overlays.

Altum Rainbow unveiled its plans to open the 34-unit complex at the coastal town in May, little more than a year after it bought the Wyvern Rd block for $3.35 million.

The notice said the bushfire hazard had not been “appropriately managed” to protect the safety of residents, and the environmental values were not protected “due to the extent of vegetation clearing required off-site to address the bushfire hazard”.

Altum Rainbow is asking the court to overturn the rejection and allow the development, saying the council’s reasons for denying it were “erroneous”.

It planned to bulldoze existing beach homes on the land to build the unit complex, which would have included a three-storey apartment building, five two-storey townhouses, a gym, and a pool.

They claim the development can be conditioned to comply with the planning scheme, saying it was appropriately set back from bushfire hazards areas and there was an appropriate fire break around the complex and agreements with Native Title owners for its management in place.
It said no new vegetation clearing was required to ensure its protection from bushfire risks.

The developers said the reasons given by the council were “factually incorrect”, including some which were “unreasonable” and “unlawful” as they conflict with sections of the Planning Act 2016.

The council has entered its appearance on the matter but not yet lodged a defence to the claims.