New plan will bring legal certainty to key issue for North Lakes golf course development

Controversial plans to develop golf course north of Brisbane into a retirement village have taken a surprise twist, with a new twist that could stop the proposal at the gate.

PLANS for a controversial golf course development north of Brisbane have taken a surprise twist, with a plan that could stop the proposal at the gate.

Moreton Bay Council has offered to pay for independent legal advice to determine whether it was legal for a developer to lodge an application for a retirement village on the former North Lakes Resort Golf Course.

Residents ‘not eating’ over North Lakes golf course plan

About 200 people protest the sale of North Lakes Resort Golf Club

North Lakes golf course will close on August 11 after sale to developer

Developer wants more community feedback over golf course plans

Council cannot refuse to accept application for development

Both the developer and the community group opposing it have agreed to the council’s request.

Back in July 2018, North Lakes residents woke to news that “the lungs” of the suburb would be closed and turned into a retirement village and aged care facility.

Developer The Village Retirement Group bought the site last August and planned to turn a large portion of it into public green space.

The community rallied and formed Save North Lakes Golf Course (SNLGC) to oppose the development on behalf of its membership, several thousand strong.

Guests at the Save North Lakes golf Course public meeting on Sunday, August 5, 2018. Picture: Matt Williamson

With a formal development application yet to be lodged, SNLGC has argued that a retirement village was prohibited on that land, as stated in the Mango Hill Infrastructure Development Control Plan.

TVRG has stated that its legal advice suggested the development could go ahead.

Moreton Bay Regional Council CEO Greg Chemello met with both parties last week, and has requested they get legal advice from a third party solicitor with expertise in planning.

In a letter sent to both SNLGC and TVRG. Mr Chemello stated that if they agreed to the suggestion, both parties would have to accept the advice, whatever it may be.

Division 4 councillor Jodie Shipway said all parties were approaching discussions in good faith.

Moreton Bay Council Division 4 councillor Jodie Shipway.

“I’m pleased everyone’s come to the table to talk about this proposal, because this is an important issue for North Lakes,” she said.

“Locals have lived with some anxiety about this for some years now and are rightly looking for some clarity, the same is true I would think for the land owner.

“Moreton Bay Region’s newly elected council is committed to a new era of transparency and accountability. So if there’s any way that council can play an intermediary role in discussions between the private owner of the former golf course land and local residents, then I absolutely think we should be facilitating that.

“I want to be clear that no development application has been lodged with the council, so this is the right time to be having a conversation about how we move forward.

“Most important to me is ensuring locals have a voice in this, and I think this is a good way to ensure that happens.”

Justin Harrison from The Village Retirement Group at North Lakes Resort Golf Club. (AAP Image/Richard Walker)

This outcome of the legal advice could either open the door for TVRG to lodge its proposed application, or deem it unlawful.

Both parties have confirmed with North Lakes Times that they will accept Mr Chemello’s suggestion.

The agreement means that future debate about the lawful planning process could be resolved quickly, and avoids a future legal challenge about lodging an application.

SNLGC vice president Phil Carlson said it was a step in the right direction.

“The North Lakes community has been in limbo since the initial announcement in July 2018,” he said.

“We are very confident that the community’s emphatic refusal to accept a prohibited development will be vindicated”.

As part of the agreement, both parties were expected to provide their own legal advice to the independent solicitor to help that person understand the different interpretations of law.