Sandy Creek, Flinders Chase National Park, Kangaroo Island, SA

Construction of tourism accommodation (comprising eight accommodation pods, a longhouse, two lookouts, a services building and ancillary water tanks and connecting pathways) in association with the Kangaroo Island Wilderness Trail.

External link Read more information

We found this application for you on the planning authority's website over 1 year ago. It was received by them 15 days earlier.

(Source: South Australia Planning Portal, reference 520/L006/18)


Have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. Patrizia Bronzi commented

    To whom this may concern,
    Sandy Creek and it's surrondings are unique and what makes it special is that its wild, untouched, unspoilt by us. This place and the few that are left like this are worthy of our outmost respect and protection. My insight on this proposed development is that its on a scale that will reduce the effectivess of conservation efforts. I therefore ask that you and all concerned in the decision making of Sandy Creek's fate would please put the land, the natural habitat and the wishes of the local Kangaroo Island people first.
    I look forward to your reply and any updates on this matter.
    Kind regards
    Patrizia Bronzi

  2. Maggie Welz commented

    Ssndy Creek is not on the walking trail. It is a beautiful wild bay you can walk to and experience isolation and wilderness. The proposed development for the benefit of a few, would destroy this. National Parks are there for a reason.Protecting Wilderness is a duty of our elected leaders.For a government to consider going against its own guidelines for monetary gain is worrying and needs reconsidering. Many people with foresight and vision set up Flinders Chase National Park. It was not easy. Save our Wild places for the future.

  3. Prue Coulls commented

    Australian Walking Company and the State Government should stick to the original tender approval. These luxury Eco-tents were originally planned to be on the walking trail, which would mean that no extra roads/tracks would be needed for their completion. Current pans are to build in new areas. New roads, tracks and huge vegetation clearance will result. And this will be for the privileged few. The Government has lost sight of the value of wild places - and the value of large tracks of wilderness conserved in our Parks and Reserves. 2019 should have been a year to celebrate one hundred year since Flinders Chase was dedicated as a Park.

  4. Janine Mackintosh, President, Friends of Dudley Peninsula Parks commented

    The Friends of Dudley Peninsula Parks actively support the Kangaroo Island Wilderness Trail. Many members have walked the trail. We welcome its focus on the natural splendour of Flinders Chase, plus the impetus it gives to existing island businesses.

    The original trail concept included provision for discreet cabin or ’glamping-style’ accommodation in close proximity to the trail and making use of existing infrastructure and access tracks. However, the proposal for two ten-building lodges in highly sensitive and visible coastal sites up to three kilometres from the trail is clearly at odds with the original trail concept.

    Our group is concerned about the serious ecological impact of these lodges and associated roads and tracks. No less alarming is the damage inflicted on the wilderness character of these pristine shores. The clifftop lodges would undermine the elemental experience the wilderness trail seeks to provide – as well as spoil the coastline’s visual appeal for other park users.

    On this basis the FDPP opposes this radical proposal.

    Throughout our history we have been a non-political group. However, as the changes proposed for Flinders Chase strike at the heart of what our parks are for, we have no choice but to take this difficult decision to suspend our operations within DEW-managed lands.

    We look forward to resuming our program following a proper review of this accommodation proposal and a return to the original KIWT concept.

    Janine Mackintosh
    President, Friends of Dudley Peninsula Parks

  5. Becky Westbrook commented

    'Mummy, why do they want to build a hotel on that hill? I thought National Parks were for being in the wild?' That is what my 6 year old daughter said to me last time we were at Sandy Creek. How can I answer her? I grew up believing that National Park's were for the protection and conservation of the wilderness too. I am all for getting people out and experiencing our beautiful Flinders Chase National Park, but not like this. Keep it discreet, keep it on the track or the concept of a National Park will be forever changed.

  6. mia vickery commented

    The proposed AWC development BREACHES the Flinders Chase National Park Management Plan - Amended. The Plan states that development should be low key, eco-style and nearby to the Sandy Creek camping area on the Wilderness Trail. The AWC proposed development at Sandy Bay is kilometres away (approx 3 kms.), and in a pristine environment.

  7. Nicky Wells commented

    If this development goes ahead, we are effectively saying: “National Parks aren’t worth keeping wild”.
    What can we tell our children’s children.... that we thought it was OK to deny them the very simplest joys of life - to see Nature alive and untouched - because it would make us a few more dollars?? Since when did Nature have to start paying for itself??

  8. John Matheson commented

    The Flinders Chase National Park, Kelly Hill Conservation Park, Ravine des Casoars Wilderness Protection Area and Cape Bouguer Wilderness Protection Area Management Plans Amendment 2017 enables the development of small scale, ecologically sensitive accommodation for trail walkers within minor development zones.

    The current AWC proposal is neither minor nor ‘along’ the trail, nor located in minor development zones specified in the management plan. Therefore the AWC proposal should be rejected, or relocated and redeveloped to comply with the business plan amendment as required by the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972.

  9. Stephen Davey commented

    Flinders Chase represents the last, best hope for habitat preservation in the southern parts of SA. So little remains of the natural environment in the higher rainfall areas of the state.
    Is it asking so much that we simply leave this place alone for the generations to come?
    A handful of enlightened people lobbied for decades to save the unique landscape of the Chase. We will be judged very harshly if we allow their legacy to be destroyed for short term gain.
    Please don't do this to Flinders Chase.

  10. Jesse jenner commented

    Absolutely disgraceful what this company is doing! They hide behind the misguided premise of providing an eco friendly experience for those who will pay considerable dollars. This is an untouched region of wilderness of which there is very little left in the world. This will not only effects the island. If this goes ahead it effectively plants the seed for further developments in parks all over the place over the next 100 years. I wonder what those forward thinking people of over 100 years ago who thought it would be a good idea to conserve a fraction of land for generations to come would be thinking now... what’s next?! Kakadu

  11. Jesse Jenner commented

    Whoops...the seed has sprouted in Kakadu it seems. This further pushes the point that Not much has been left alone...
    Please leave flinders chase alone

  12. Penny Rowe commented

    Please stop this development. There is enough accomodation on the island without building in the national park.

  13. Emma Bell commented

    The Flinders Chase National Park Management Plan Amendment 2017 stated new “minor development zones” including the Kangaroo Island Wilderness Trail. Sandy Creek and Sanderson Bay are NOT listed as minor development zones and are not markedly on the map as part of the trail. Does DEW provide maps that show the actual boundaries of these development zones or are they adapted to suit?

  14. Tim Kelly commented

    1. The clearance as identified is not plausible and is not consistent with requirements for fire preparedness and access for fire vehicles anywhere else in the state.

    2. The proposals in bushfire risk locations that could only be assessed as extreme with poor communications, poor access and no possibility for staff or occupants to reach safer places, could not be made safe even with a dramatic increase in fire asset zones, buffer zones and access roads.

    3. The proposal if approved could either:
    • Trigger a statewide challenge of development approval conditions which demand extensively greater clearance, vehicle access and turning points, additional asset [protection zones or.
    • Lead to the subsequent further clearance of much larger areas of native vegetation at Flinders Chase for achieving the minimum standard for fire vehicle access and turning, greater asset protection zones around the developments and all access roads, with additional bushfire buffer zone at Sandy Creek.

    4. AWC as the proponent , the land owner being Department of Environment and Water on behalf of South Australians and the authorising Native Vegetation Council, do not actually have the authority to confine the clearance to 1.715 hectares. Further clearance may occur for a variety of reasons and will be approved or exempt from approval as incidental to an approved development, including:
    • Fire access roads, bridges and turning points in accordance with the mandatory requirements of the Ministers Code of Practice for undertaking Development in fire prone areas.
    • The Kangaroo Island Bushfire Management Committee (made up of a range of government and non-government nominees) may require additional asset protection and/or a bushfire buffer zone (at Sandy Creek) and along access roads and/or burning for kilometres around both development sites, access tracks and existing roads.
    • There is no authority to confine prescription burning for ecological/environmental objectives only, and it is probable that within a short time, there will be additional burning in the area for reducing risks to life and property. This will further erode the wilderness value of the park.
    • At any time, the CFS can authorise large fuel reduction burns for non-environmental life and property protection needs at the sites and at the staging areas and near access roads and tracks, caused by these developments.

    5. To be consistent with the Park Management Plan and the Government People in Parks Strategy, these developments should be built in locations that are already cleared such as at camping grounds and existing settled infrastructure sites, away from unspoiled wilderness.

    To see more detail, the Planning Authority/SCAP is welcome to read my full submission on the proposed native vegetation clearance, provided to the Native Vegetation Council.
    Kind regards
    Tim Kelly

  15. Craig Wilkins commented

    Flinders Chase National Park is the most botanically unique area in South Australia.

    Plans to build luxury accommodation villages in the Park on wild coastal sites with staggeringly beautiful views are not appropriate and will see intact vegetation cleared for their construction and ongoing operation.

    To be consistent with the Park Management Plan and the Government People in Parks Strategy, these developments must be confined to locations on already cleared areas at camping grounds and existing settled infrastructure sites, away from unspoiled wilderness.

    The local Friends of Flinders Chase National Park volunteers are clear: any tourism development linked to the KI Wilderness Trail must be on the track, not located kilometres away in the middle of intact wilderness.

    Major development on public land – let alone in the middle of a fragile wilderness area – requires far greater community scrutiny and transparency than development on private land.

    We urge the State Government to suspend the current private development plans for one of our oldest and best loved parks and start talking to the Friends of Flinders Chase about better options.

    Craig Wilkins
    Chief Executive
    Conservation SA

  1. Have you made a donation or gift to a Councillor or Council employee? You may need to disclose this.

  2. Please use your real full name if possible.

  1. We never display your street address. Why do you need my address?

This week

Find PlanningAlerts useful?

This independent project is run by a local charity, the OpenAustralia Foundation. PlanningAlerts is powered by small, tax-deductible donations from the people who use it to stay informed about changes to their local area. If you find it useful, chip in to support PlanningAlerts.

Back PlanningAlerts