9 Dux Drive, Bongaree QLD 4507

Request to Change (Minor) - Material Change of Use - Development Permit for Undefined Land Use (404 Dwellings, Sales Centre, Display Home, Community Facilities, Manager's Residence & Recreational Area)

External link Read more information

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

(Source: Moreton Bay Regional Council, reference 2016/31292/VCHG/3)

16 Comments

Have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. Kerry simmons commented

    I cannot believe that gem life have the audacity to take over the whole lake. And stop the general public and neighbours from enjoying this very special part of bribie. A lot of people from the older neighborhood near the lake enjoy the tranquility of their afternoon walks with their pets. Its a very selfish ideal from the gem life organization. Just more money hungry developers based overseas. I hope our council will reject their proposal for the good of the greater rate paying community. Not just the wealthier people in society. This is our bribie. Let's leave a little bit of natures beauty for all to enjoy.

  2. Jaz Burton commented

    MBRC need to realise a “lake” is a “lake”!
    It’s not another money making land grab at the suffering of everyone & everything else!
    Think about the hundreds of residents who bought property in Bribie Lakes for the lake, think about the animals who live on or around the lake, think of the original purpose of the lake (apart from being
    Aesthetically pleasing), it was built for storm water management & flood mitigation.
    MBRC need to stand up to large corporations (especially overseas) & stop the current situation of thinking that throwing any amount of money at council will get them over the line & that the laws & regulations that apply now all of a sudden don’t matter.
    Council make these rules for a reason, so I am not sure why this application hasn’t already been thrown out & also why any extensions have been given.

    If gemlife want to extend their development then they should invest in “land” like everyone else has to, to build on.

  3. Derek Patey commented

    MBRC have declined this application on the basis of it not being a minor change. The applicant was offered the mandatory 20 days to object to this decision. The applicant is now asking for more time to present their case. They should have taken the application a bit more seriously in the first place! I trust MRBC will stick to the policies and procedures and not allow them more time. This application needs to move onto a Major Change and give Bribie Island residents time to fight what appears to be an application that does not consider the lifestyle of both our native animals and people outside their own community.

  4. Damien Synot commented

    It is absolutely clear that the original application to council involved the preservation of the lake as a community accessible area for the Bribie Lakes development and the broader community. The original application also highlighted the environmental and aesthetic importance to the Bribie Lakes community. The current application brings into question the validity of the original application and more importantly, whether the negotiations for the transfer of the lake to Gemlife were ever undertaken in good faith. Since the premise of the original application is being altered by this application, should we fairly expect a retrospective review of the original application?

  5. Gordon Bentzen commented

    It does seem strange that Council has approved the transfer of the "lake" into the hands of a private developer when the original purpose was for rainwater and flood management of the whole area around the lake.
    The hundreds of people who purchased in "Bribie Lakes" would never have envisaged such a proposal as to build private residences over part of the lake.
    We all will be very disappointment if this unusual development is allowed to proceed.

    The other thing which worries me is the fact that the Gem Life over 50's resort is promoted as a "gated community". It is hard imagine just how that will be applied to the planned 18 homes along Bongaree Ave in particular. Their seems to be little detail on their plans there. No doubt they will have a "plan" which may also be detrimental to the existing homes in Bongaree Ave. Would they spring another "innovative solution"?? How likely is it that Bongaree Ave would become a Private Road?
    Council, please do not approve this application and do not allow this to proceed any further.

  6. Lyn Cockerell commented

    I think that it is didgusting that Gem Life can even consider monopolising the lake for themselves. It was originally built for flood mitigation and then developed for the community and wildlife to enjoy. They are wanting to progress for their own greed and with no consideration for the community as a whole.
    There is no way that their application is a "minor" change.Council please do NOT approve the developement as it will have a great impact on the community

  7. Arlene Taylor commented

    Stilt houses built over water are not a normal part of the Australian built environment. If Gem's application is approved we are bound to see this type of development on more of our waterways to the detriment of the environment and local communities. Gem's current proposal seeks to remove all the vegetation from the banks of Dux Lake. The banks will then be in permanent shade underneath the stilt house structures. How long will it then take for the banks and the lake to become stagnant. No amount of additional floating reed beds will replicate the storm water filtering that is achieved by the existing vegetation. Even though Gem "owns" the lake it is NOT a closed system like a swimming pool. It has environmental flows into and out of the lake that are essential for flood mitigation and the health of the waterway. In this sense Gem doesn't own the water and should never be allowed to compromise the vital functions of the lake. The contribution the lake makes to the amenity of the community cannot be ignored. We walk beside it, enjoy the views, and watch the wildlife living and breeding in what is now a healthy and functional wetland. Council must say no to a development that represents corporate greed and disregards the health of the local community and environment. 28 additional homes squeezed on to a site that already has plans for over 400 seems like a very small gain for Gem against a very big loss for the community and the environment.

  8. Lee Phillips commented

    When the concept of the estate was presented to council originally as Bribie Lakes the central feature was the large lake. The whole idea of the estate was to have access to lake views for all who purchased land and built there. Gemlife purchased land on the lakeside which is fine, but now propose to completely change the lake to a private area excluding access and enjoyment of Bribie Lake residents but also the Gemlife residents who don’t live in a lakeside home. Instead of the current walks along Bongaree Ave on paths and grassy the lake, with all the birdlife and vegetation that go with it, they are being asked to use a boardwalk over the lake or miss out. If the boardwalk idea was popular they’d use the existing one running on the Gemlife side of the lake. But no, they use the Bongaree Ave pathway like all the other Bribie Lakes residents. I also have concerns about the pollution of dog excrement and household waste and chemical runoff going into the lake if 28 homes and a boardwalk are built out over it. This water runs out to Pumicestone Passage via canals with homes that aren’t built out over it. Council must protect this water.

  9. Carol Wood commented

    Several presumably qualified people have given their opinions on what will happen to excess water in the lake in times of flooding rain. However all these opinions are only speculation until we do get a proper wet season. Since the lake was constructed South east Queensland has virtually been in drought. We have not had flooding rains in the last 7/8 years so not even the Experts really know what will occur. Council should take this fact into consideration when deciding this application which is indisputably a major change.

  10. Lee Phillips commented

    When the concept of the estate was presented to council originally as Bribie Lakes the central feature was the large lake. The whole idea of the estate was to have access to lake views for all who purchased land and built there. Gemlife purchased land on the lakeside which is fine, but now propose to completely change the lake to a private area excluding access and enjoyment of Bribie Lake residents but also the Gemlife residents who don’t live in a lakeside home. Instead of the current walks along Bongaree Ave on paths and grassy the lake, with all the birdlife and vegetation that go with it, they are being asked to use a boardwalk over the lake or miss out. If the boardwalk idea was popular they’d use the existing one running on the Gemlife side of the lake. But no, they use the Bongaree Ave pathway like all the other Bribie Lakes residents. I also have concerns about the pollution of dog excrement and household waste and chemical runoff going into the lake if 28 homes and a boardwalk are built out over it. This water runs out to Pumicestone Passage via canals with homes that aren’t built out over it. Council must protect this water.

  11. Anita Cooper commented

    This IS a MAJOR change not a minor change and that's why it should be changed. We are SO lucky to have the magpie geese nest on the raft in the lake with their little chicks on the Bongaree Ave edge of the lake. Locals walk along the lake in this serene enviroment. That IS or would be a MAJOR change. It will not enhance an area that people chose to live because of the view and serenity. And whoever heard of a footpath owned half by the council and half the landowner. Something doesn't add up.

  12. Tania Simmons commented

    Please receive my objection to the proposed Gemlife MCU application.

    I urge Council to reject the proposed minor change and also to reject outright the proposed design concept to construct 28 new homes immediately adjacent to Dux Lake.

    My objection is based on the significant negative impacts this proposal will bring, compromising the values of the local environment and ecology, local amenity and community, and local economy.

    Dux Lake’s design purpose was to address local drainage and flood mitigation in an environmentally sensible way whilst having additional ecological and amenity value. Building the proposed 28 new dwellings with no buffer to the lake and it’s ecology is environmentally irresponsible and will no doubt also impact local drainage and flood management considerations.

    Neighbourhood amenity is focused around Dux Lake. The community can currently enjoy waterfront views and access parkland, walkways, picnic and sporting facilities, all with a feeling of openness and space. This will be restricted to the few and taken from the majority under this proposal.

    Bribie Lakes Estate and Gemlife developments were marketed highlighting the values of Dux Lake. In particular it’s amenity. Waterfront blocks sold at a premium reflecting this. This proposal completely compromises the values of the Lake not only for those properties immediately adjacent but to the whole suburb’s amenity. The waterfront esplanade quality of Bongaree Avenue will be lost. Clearly this will negatively impact local residential property values.

    This is an ill-conceived proposal from Gemlife. It will be bad for the local community, the local economy and the local environment. Council should reject this proposal outright.
    Regards
    Tania Simmons
    B. App. Sc. (Hons); Dip. T.
    Property Owner: Cod Crt, Bongaree

  13. Derek Patey commented

    In regards to this development application, which I understand is currently under evaluation. I believe that calling a multimillion dollar development minor is nothing short of bizarre and it does make one wonder what has been the motivation of the developer to take this pathway.
    Secondly, it has been made apparent that half of the footpath along Bongaree Avenue belongs to the developer. I believe there should be total stay on proceedings until a public enquiry is held to establish how a developer ends up owning half of a public footpath. This appears a serious transgression towards the Bribie Island Community. An enquiry is a must!

  14. Gabrielle Cain commented

    As a resident of Bribie Lakes for the past 3 years I have enjoyed the area while out walking this side of the lake and object strongly to the homes on the lake that Gem life are proposing to build.The residents do not want to put up with the noise for the next few years, of continual disruption to our lifestyle not to mention the trades people parking outside our homes and the rubbish let behind for us to clean up as has happened in the past.How can the council let this happen ? Please listen to us as a United neighbourhood and stop this bizarre proposal and let us enjoy our retirement in peace. Please acknowledge this e mail as a concerned resident,

  15. Gerry mcneall commented

    If council agree to this development it will prove what people have been saying for years that the councils think more of developers than their rate paying constituents.

  16. Pauline Mahon commented

    Moreton Bay Regional Council prides itself on promoting health and wellbeing for its residents. Bribie Lake does just this. It is a place where people walk their dogs, sometimes twice per day, meet chat and enjoy the lake and it surrounds. Is it worth taking this away FOR GOOD just for the sake of a few more houses? Please consider carefully.

  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