Anger over Warner development approval with residents concerned over the removal of koala habitat

A decision over a 460-lot development north of Brisbane has angered the community, who claim it will result in the destruction of a large urban koala habitat.

Plans for development at CSR’s quarry in Warner have been given a green light. Picture: Google

MORETON BAY Council has again come under fire for its treatment of koala habitat in the face of development, with a controversial plan “rushed” though the Chamber today.

Councillors voted 10-2 in favour of rezoning industrial land on a former quarry at 107-109 Kremzow Rd, Warner, and pave the way a 460-lot housing development.

Warner development proposal alarms residents

CSR quarry at Warner to become housing development

A man is being hailed a hero after saving a koala at Warner

Clock resets on CSR’s quarry project at Warner

About 1300 new lots expected in Warner

Councillors reject Ausbuild application in Warner

Developer appeals council decision

Council report sparked fears for an urban koala habitat

The applicant CSR has gone above and beyond what is expected of any developer operating in Moreton Bay to work with the community and produce a fauna friendly estate that would largely protect koalas living on the site.

Moreton Bay Council, however, has imposed a number of conditions on CSR’s proposal that have concerned some residents over the impact it would have on koalas living in trees that may be removed under the approval.

CSR though has welcomed the decision.

“We are happy with the zoning change to residential, which meets the expectations of the community,” a CSR spokeswiman said.

“We thank the community for their support and we look forward to further dialogue with Council.”

Residents outside the council chamber after Ausbuild's Warner Rd development application was rejected. Picture: David Alexander

The approval could spell the end for around 2000 mature koala habitat in the north of the site in order to widen Kremzow Rd and build a new access road near Swan Pde.

Tracking data has shown that koalas do actually live in these trees.

The council though dismissed the number, saying it was closer to 100.

“Complex conditions that at face value seem like a win, but dig a little deeper and one can see the cracks,” a Save Our Community Warner spokeswoman stated.

Warner resident Christine West, who is part of the Warner Working Group working alongside CSR to produce the fauna friendly housing development, told Pine Rivers Press she was gutted by today’s outcome.

“Three years worth of our lives has been spent coming up with a great plan, and the council has just ignored what we want,” she said.

An early Warner Investigation Area development map with Ausbuild and CSR properties highlighted.

“We thought we were going to have change with this new council but clearly not.

“We are now calling for a review of the council’s planning department.”

Bizarrely, there were changes made to the application by the council overnight, and a further amendment added during the meeting for something planners said would have been addressed later anyway.

Cr Brooke Savige (Div 1) voted against the proposal, along with Cr Cath Tonks (Div 9), saying she felt she was being rushed to make a decision without fully understanding the proposal.

“What’s been put forward has been quite different to what we have been working on with that working group,” she said.

“CSR has spent considerable time and effort trying to get this right.

CSR's Warner Quarry development landscape concept plan showing proposed wildlife corridors.

“I would have liked the opportunity to go out and have a look at the trees (to be removed) for example.

“I feel very rushed to make this decision and I haven’t had sufficient time to really analyse what has changed throughout this process.”

Cr Matt Constance defended the council’s changes to the development, saying it was “just putting the sprinkles on the cake to make sure everything is filled in a little bit”.

“There is nothing in here that we are considering that actually weakens the work the community has done to get CSR to this point,” he said.

In response, Cr Savige stated that the working group was hoping this development would demonstrate that a fauna friendly housing estate could still be profitable for developers.

“Their aim was to encourage more developers to move down that path and while we might not be watering down anything from a planning perspective, anything that decreases profitability will impact on (a developer’s) ability to achieve those goals.

A council planner stated that any commitments that CSR made to the working group “would be on CSR and the third party to uphold those commitments”.

“We’ve sought to provide a framework which is sustainable for the development,” he said.

“If a developer was to choose or commit to going over and above (the planning scheme), that would be an obligation for the developer to consider among their commercial activities.”