1 Esplanade, Godwin Beach QLD 4511

Material Change of Use - Development Permit for Nature Based Tourism (20 sites)

External link Read more information

We found this application for you on the planning authority's website 2 months ago. It was received by them 3 days earlier.

(Source: Moreton Bay Regional Council, reference 2020/40994/V2L)

17 Comments

Have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. Stewart James Hill commented

    My Name is Stewart James Hill of 28 May Street Godwin Beach. I completely disagree with the proposal for the development of 1 Esplanade Godwin Beach. I feel that the environmental impact will be far greater than the report indicates. There are a great number of Macropods that use this area for safe haven. As a local resident, I very often see them in this area. I also feel that there would be a large number of other animals and bird life that would be affected. I would also add that over time, the mangrove area on the southern boundary would be significantly affected by occupants of the camping area.
    As indicated in the report, May street is a single lane street with two way traffic. Local residents respect the speed limits in the area. As the area is family based with lots of children that ride bikes and walk around the streets safely, the introduction of non residential traffic would be dangerous to the local families.
    I would also object to the increase in traffic in construction phase in our single lane street. If locals park on the roadside as the law states and not on the footpath as they currently do for safety reasons, there would be no trough traffic for construction vehicles.

    I strongly believe that there should be a residential meeting organised for discussing the proposal before a single sod of soil is turned.

  2. Leigh Adams commented

    Hi,

    I completely agree with the above comment. I also find it quite appalling that there has been no community consultation on this matter whatsoever. As residents we should have been advised, even if the structure is classed as 'temporary'. Though I don't see how it could be classed as temporary with an admin building, amenities and en suites for all safari tents. With plans to start construction within 6-10 weeks I would like more information on what the plans are for this site. It seems from the attached documents that this could possibly be stage 1 of many planned stages to come. The traffic and environmental impact is quite concerning. Also the fact that this development backs onto existing houses with an application attached to play amplified music. If office hours are from 7am - 7pm who will be enforcing noise restrictions after this time? I am also sure that this site will be accommodating those going to larger concerts at Sandstone Point Hotel. Will noise be monitored on their return being only walking distance?
    Many questions to be answered by the residents on these matters before development starts.
    Regards
    Leigh

  3. Wendy Hedge commented

    I strongly oppose the proposal for the development of 1 Esplanade Godwin Beach Qld 4511.
    I feel the environmental impact is very concerning and would most likely ruin this small community.
    Stewart James Hill has already highlighted some concerns to the impact on the environment.
    The traffic to May Street and Esplanade would greatly impact the residents.
    Most residents including children ride bikes and walk these streets knowing it is only the local traffic who respect speed limits. These streets are the daily school bus route with many local children riding by bus to school.
    Safety and our quality of lifestyle is a huge concern/issue.
    Community consultation should be taken into account and residents be given the opportunity to object.

  4. James unwin commented

    As a local resident I completely agree with everything that everyone else has listed to date and as the person who will be closest to these campsites I strongly oppose this and cannot believe that there hasn't been any community consultation from council or from the people who are proposing this work. I may not have found out about this until construction had started if not for the fact that I happened to be home from work and ran in to someone out front who informed me of this proposal. This is going to drastically change our way of life. I have a young family of 3 children ranging in age from 1 year to 12 years old as well as partner who is the nurse who frequently does night shifts and often needs to sleep during days. I fear that I will no longer be able to live where I am due to noise and greater traffic with campsites being extremely close to my house and the front driveway to a 23 car car park coming across my front yard. My front yard is also where my kids enjoy playing with other kids in the neighbourhood as it is a very quiet Street usually only driven by locals who respect the area. The proposed 2 m high noise barrier around my yard is going to do absolutely nothing except make my backyard feel like a prison considering my house is build 2.4m to floor level which I had to build at that height due to flood level specified by council. I feel that there will be loud uncontrolled music been played there of a night time and high volumes of people going in and out during the day, also noisy people returning from the Sandstone Point Hotel late at night. I fear that my property will be greatly depreciated by this project going ahead and I will be forced to sell to get my family away from this, potentially costing me hundreds of thousands of dollars. I really hope that the council consult the locals and listen to what they are saying. This is not the sort of area that needs this and I believe it would be much better suited elsewhere.

  5. Terence Corbett commented

    MBRC Planners and Councillors ,

    I refer to the current application for material change to zoning for 1 Esplanade , Godwin Beach , currently before the Moreton Bay Regional Council for the change of zoning from Rural to Tourism and the consequent development application for the development of an “Eco” tourist park / camping area.

    My objection to this rezoning and redevelopment is for the following reasons in summary :

    1. Ecological and Environmental : Particularly pertaining to international migratory birdlife , and
    2. Traffic and Urban Safety : The ongoing effect of the increased activity both vehicle and pedestrian in the local area and it’s effect not only on the delicate balance of the natural ecology but also on the existing quiet cul-de-sac style residential environment at Godwin Beach.

    More detailed information for objection to tourist park development application :

    1. Ecological and Environmental :

    Godwin Beach - Identified roost habitat for 2 select international shore bird species :

    It is suggested in the application that the area in consideration for development is of no environmental, ecological or heritage significance . This statement is contrary to the significance placed on this area identifying the western wetlands of Godwin Beach as a roost area for international migratory shorebirds including the Eastern Curlew which is listed as an Endangered species in Queensland under the Nature Conservation Act 1992 (Queensland) September 2017 list . (Refer Australian Government website link :
    http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/publicspecies.pl?taxon_id=847 and MBRC document reference : Moreton Bay Regional Council Shorebird Habitat Mapping Project by David Milton and Jill Denning , Report No. 640/1-20-5P , 30 June 2009.

    Also unique to the Godwin Beach roosting habitat (and only a few others within the Moreton Bay Area ) is the Type 2 Habitat as noted in the reference document. The application area identifies 2 out of only 3 international species that utilise this habitat to roost. The area appears to be within the application zone if the report’s guidelines for urban development are followed .

    Refer to Page 17 , Map 4 showing roost sites specifically identified during the time period that the study was undertaken. It should be noted that the region at the western end of Godwin Beach ( the general area of the application for the development) was identified as a Habitat Code Type 2 during the study.

    Refer to Pages 44 and 45 of the MBRC Shorebird Habitat Mapping Project document table Site 20 , Godwin Beach , which lists the western end of Godwin Beach mangrove and wetlands as a Type 2 roosting area designated as code TECSM within the context of the study.

    Per Page 9 paragraph 3.1 this Roost Habitat classification encompasses the following region around the identified Godwin Beach roost area observed at the time :
    T = Coastal Tidal
    E= Coastal Bay , inlet or estuary
    C= Marine
    S- Sand
    M=Mud

    Per Page 9 paragraph 3.1.1 (in summary ) :

    Of the 40,000 shorebirds of 42 species of shorebird (waders) that come to the Moreton Bay Region to roost , there are 5 different classifications used in the report for roosting . Within those 5 roost classifications , there are only 3 species that use exposed tree branches or trees at high tide as staging roosts within 1 -2 klms. of the high tide level.

    Those 3 species are the Grey Tailed Tattler , the Terek Sandpiper and the Whimbrel.

    Two of those three species (Grey Tailed Tattler and the Terek Sand Piper) are identified as using the wetlands at the end of Godwin Beach as a roost area .

    The Grey Tailed Tattler migrates from Polynesia to Godwin Beach and the Terek Sand Piper migrates here from Russia / Finland in the summer months.

    While this development application is for a change of zoning from Rural to Tourism it should be noted that the type of development proposed is in a sense more high impact than an urban development application in that it requires the removal of most if not all vegetation from the site and on an ongoing basis , there will be a high turnover of human activity (including the use of common outdoor cooking and entertaining areas , car parking , garbage disposal, etc.) within the site.

    I therefore refer to Page 65 , Appendix E ,”Major Management issues and Suggested Guidelines – Local government shorebird factsheet and guidelines for planners which states that “ for instance the birds will have different requirements in different seasons , tides and weather conditions. Therefore it is important to maintain a variety of habitats in a wetland. A recommended buffer is to ensure that assessable development is 200m from the highest astronomical tide. “

    Notably, under threats (Page 44 , Site 20 Godwin Beach ) is mentioned the following
    “Likely high disturbance (to habitat would occur) from walkers, pets and possibly vehicles” which the new tourist park development would be encouraging by default.

    2. Traffic and Urban Safety :

    Godwin Beach is a very small community with only one way in and one way out . For that reason it enjoys similar characteristics as a community to that of a cul-de-sac . This is recognized by the fact that the speed limit in the area is 50klm/hour.

    Residents as a rule have to park partly (if not completely ) on the footpath to enable the school buses that use the Esplanade , Oak Street and May Street twice every morning and afternoon to use the streets safely.

    The width of these small residential streets is about 8.5 metres . Given that the standard width of a parking bay is nominally 2.5m , it is easy to see that when 2 vehicles are parked opposite or nearly opposite each other on these streets that there is only enough room for one vehicle to pass between them.

    Should any visitors to the proposed tourist park need to park on the street in Oak Street or May street (particularly at the right angle bend in the streets ) it will be extremely difficult if not impossible for the school bus to negotiate the corner comfortably given the turning circle of the bus.

    The other major concern given the increase in traffic flow and additional congestion is the safety of residents and children in the street around these vehicles.

    Even though there are 20 campsites proposed , the nature of the proposed development (Tourism) will necessitate a high turnover of occupancy (daily or weekly) necessitating much more vehicle traffic than an urban development of similar size would attract.

    General observations :

    As noted in the Environmental and Ecological objection (Objection 1) there will be a significant increase in noise from the facility’s individual and common areas with people cooking , socialising , etc. This is of concern to local residents as well as adjoining property owners.

    Everything within the application states that the facility is “temporary”.

    It therefore needs to be asked by council as to what the permanent intensions of the applicant are and this should form part of the same application and include community consultation.

    I therefore wish to lodge these objections for councilors’ consideration in their duty of care in due process while reviewing this development application .

    The references , information and subsequent objections raised are all verifiable in the documents quoted and available in the public domain .

  6. Pat Spice commented

    To MBRC Councillors and Planners

    Please listen to the local residents for a change. I agree with the objections of T Corbett and all others who have objected to this proposed development which is not wanted and will be of no benefit to the local community. The quiet and peaceful lifestyle we enjoy here will be gone forever. We feel we were misled and misinformed by the whole Sandstone Point Hotel debacle and we don't want to be in that situation ever again. Just for once, let's not let the big money developers override the resident's wishes.

  7. Margaret DEVENISH Meares commented

    I live in Pine street and we can hear music from Sandstone point hotel how much worse is it going to be just across the road so to speak. OUR area has not a lot of room for vehicles as it is without bring in more ,our rubbish trucks cannot even turn around in our street it has to reverse out of our dead end street. The bird habitat is not something you Would really like to see destroyed and the mangroves would also be impacted by people wandering about. I really think that the residents of Godwin beach should have been notified about this, not just stumble upon it.

  8. Gaby commented

    MBRC Planners and Councillors,

    We have been residents of Godwin Beach for nearly 5 years, we were initially seeking a more tranquil and less stressful and less congested lifestyle, particularly while battling a concerning health condition. We agree to all the above concerns from our neighbours, and we wish to highlight our concern that the residents were not invited to comment to the proposed work, by the Moreton Bay Regional Council. Also we wish to add that we are concerned as to the environmental impact the development will have. We wonder if 'sustainability' is being considered for this development. The restricted access for the increased traffic is also of great concern, (particularly in case of emergency). If this initial plan is approved, what future plans does the developer have and will the residents be informed of further development on this site and will this development and future development, meet the zoning restrictions? We believe that the Moreton Bay Regional Council are not being transparent when considering this development and we are extremely disappointed.

    We are hopeful that the Moreton Bay Regional Council will take the ratepayers and residents of Godwin Beach, concerns, seriously.

  9. Paul Gillmore commented

    Paul & Barbara - 37 May Street
    MBRC Planners and Councillors
    We totally oppose the proposed development of 1 The Esplanade Godwin Beach and are extremely angry that local residents have not been consulted. We fear that the "temporary" status applied to this development is a ruse and that once the developer has committed environmental vandalism and destroyed animal, bird and mangrove habitat further development will be proposed and approved - all too late. Godwin Beach is completely unsuitable for this type of "Eco"? tourism. There is one road in and out of this small and quiet community. These roads have been designed and built for small amounts of local traffic only. The influx of transients will have a serious negative effect. There is great fear in the community about the potential variety of people who may choose a camping holiday - particularly with its proximity to the Sandstone Point Tavern. Goodwin Beach community comprises largely of elderly people and young families. Groups of young children are free and safe to ride their bikes, skate and play on the beach and on the streets. The elderly are seen daily on their walkers taking exercise on the narrow streets. We all know each other here and watch out for the safety of young and old alike. We are mindful of our speed and the proximity of the vulnerable. We are concerned that the security of properties and the peace and quiet afforded by the area which will be threatened by people who have no stake in maintaining what the residents love about Godwin Beach and why they have chosen to make it their homes. The elderly are particularly concerned about home invasion and the young families are concerned about the safety and welfare of young children. The working families are concerned about break and enter events. We are concerned that to make this a viable commercial venture for the developer - with only 20 sites - the comings and goings from the site would have to be numerous. The last remaining kangaroos and wallabies in the area graze feed and rest on the 5 acre block of the proposal. We have seen over the years the carnage on the roads in the local area where development has occurred. Once Sandstone Point was alive with kangaroos and wallabies - all now gone or killed. Where are these animals supposed to go? Each day at low tide thousands of migratory birds can be observed - resting on their mammoth journey from as far as Mongolia, China, Siberia, Russia and Alaska. These birds roost at night in the trees that will be felled and destroyed by this proposal. The mangroves which were once so fiercely protected by MBRC are now expendable. These precious fish nurseries seem now to be considered as collateral damage. Much of 37 acre block is tidal. Therefore to make it useable for heavy 4WD vehicles, boats and caravans it would require a great deal of fill to raise it above the tidal flow, which would change the hydrology of the property with potential negative impacts on adjoining and nearby properties. If at that end of Godwin Beach houses are required to be built 2.4 metres above ground level because of future innudation fears, then it stands to reason that much of this development would also have to be 2.4 metres above ground level. This is hardly an "eco" development, when the developer would have to clear fell the block, bring in massive amounts of fill, destroy wildlife, bird and fish habitat, create a carpark from a kangaroo grazing area and place a massive extra load on the amenities of the area with a greater number of people. The current zoning is rural and this should not be changed. Respect for the local community view points, concerns and opinions must be paramount.

  10. Rob Abraham commented

    Hi I'm Rob and lived on Esplanade for 4.5 year. I have been and done Eco-camping and can appreciate it's need in our country's environment. I feel that a lot of research and consultation needs to be done before any change of zoning is considered. My thought is that the area nominated is to close to suburbia to be a good eco area. I oppose this re-zoning very strongly.

  11. Suzette Hetherington commented

    I would like to add my very STRONG objection to this development and give my support wholeheartedly to those comments detailed above. I am in my 70's and bought my home here in 2016 purely and solely because of the quiet and the reassurance of being surrounded by "Reserve" land - how could this possibly be considered without consultation with the residents.
    I strongly agree with the comments outlined above by my wonderful neighbours - PLEASE DO NOT DESTROY OUR AMAZING LITTLE COMMUNITY.

  12. David Schoch commented

    MBRC Planners and Councillors,
    My wife and I are residents on Esplanade, Godwin Beach. We were surprised and dismayed to receive notification via a non-government website that an application had been received by MBRC for “Material Change of Use – Development Permit for Nature Based Tourism”, ie a Caravan Park at 1 Esplanade, Godwin Beach. Please record our strong objection to this proposal.
    We reside in a very small seaside community with no local commercial enterprises and restricted access in and out. Any such commercial development will have a major, and possibly negative impact on our quiet and relatively isolated environment.
    Apparently, the proposed development is subject to Code Assessment and as such public notification does not need to be carried out, but as a matter of concern for and courtesy to the small local community a survey of local residents to assess their concern/support or otherwise for this proposal should be undertaken by the MBRC (through our local Councillor or Council representative) before this application is assessed.
    While acknowledging and agreeing with all the points raised in previous comments we would like to add the following.
    We have read all the documents submitted with this application, all of which have been prepared and paid for by the proposed developer to support the application. As individuals with limited knowledge of government rules and regulations it is difficult to argue against their findings but I would suggest the MRBC assessors closely check particularly Appendix A - Engineering Report and Appendix C – Ecological Assessment as the results warrant further confirmation. The Ecological assessment in particular admits it is a “desktop report” which “…. only represents a ’snapshot’ in time and may not provide a true indication of presence or absence of flora and fauna species within the study.” This is certainly true as kangaroos, reptiles and a multitude of both local and migratory birds frequent this area.
    Under the MBRC Planning Scheme, the proposed development is defined as Nature Based Tourism. The applicant’s own DA Form 1 defines Nature Based Tourism as “The use of land or premises for a tourism activity, including tourist and visitor short-term accommodation, that is intended for the conservation, interpretation and appreciation of areas of environmental, cultural or heritage value, local ecosystem and attributes of the natural environment.” In other words, this proposal is attempting to be sold as a nature-based, eco-tourism project. Interesting that this terminology has been applied at this time to a campground which contains none of the characteristics referenced above (apart from the accommodation aspect}. The Queensland Government Department of Environment and Science states “Ecotourism encompasses nature-based activities that increase visitor appreciation and understanding of natural and cultural values. They are experiences that are managed to ensure they are ecologically, economically and socially sustainable, contributing to the wellbeing and conservation of the natural areas and local communities where they operate.” The World Tourism Organisation defines ecotourism as “… nature-based forms of tourism in which the main motivation of the tourists is the observation and appreciation of nature as well as the traditional cultures prevailing in natural areas an experience/activity that contains educational and interpretation features”. Again, none of these characteristics are covered in the applicant’s proposal and the development certainly does not contribute to the wellbeing and conservation of the local community.
    We are concerned that this application may be “development by stealth” as the project is proposed to be staged ie, Stages 1 and 2 have been defined but how many other stages will follow? This entire proposal reminds me of the Joni Mitchell song, Big Yellow Taxi:

    Don't it always seem to go
    That you don't know what you've got
    'Til it's gone
    They paved paradise
    Put up a parking lot

  13. Jamie Wylie commented

    I strongly object to the proposed development application. Any proposed change to the Code Assessment from Rural Zone needs to be scrutinized closely for the reasons listed below that share many of the sentiments expressed in the comments of other concerned Moreton Bay Region residents.
    There is significant environmental impact, especially on the fauna and flora, by concentrating the proposed 20 campsites and facilities in such a compact area. To include a proposal to play music shows significant ignorance to the environment. To propose this development as Ecotourism seems counter intuitive. The proposal seems to take little recognition of the saying "don't destroy what you came to enjoy".
    The settlement of Godwin Beach has a history of over 50 years and consequently a culture. The culture of Godwin Beach is unique. As expressed in the comments of other concerned residents the function of the proposed development will have negative impacts. In simple terms, these concern health and safety, especially for children.
    The aesthetics of the area will be impacted by increased traffic flow as a form of visual, noise and chemical pollution. Such impacts need to be assessed.
    In summary, the safety and tranquillity of the Godwin Beach community; the living environment of Godwin Beach are under threat by the proposed application.

  14. Robyn Gai Wylie commented

    MBRC Planners and councillors,
    I have lived in May St, Godwin Beach for three amazing years, probably the best three of my life....why you might ask... Peace, tranquillity, birdlife, quiet streets, lovely Neighbours.
    All of this and more is in jeopardy not only for me, but for everyone who lives at Godwin Beach. I strongly object to the piece of land in question (1 The Espalanade, Godwin Beach) being recoded to Tourism rather than Residential. All of the reasons have been explained numerous times in other People's objections, so I won't repeat but I want you to know that I strongly object for all of the extremely valid reasons that have already been put forward.
    I only hope that the Council actually reads these and considers all of these valid points... especially the ecosystem which is potentially in a lot of danger. I am praying that you will do the RIGHT thing here, for all concerned.

  15. Shane Jensen commented

    MBRC Planners and Councillors,
    We are residents on the Esplanade at Godwin Beach and as stated by many other residents, we too were surprised and dismayed to find out about this application for a Development Permit at 1 Esplanade, Godwin Beach, through means other than council or community consultation. We completely agree with the concerns raised in many of the comments above and don't think it necessary to restate those concerns, however we do want to go on the record as objecting to this application and would expect that all concerns and objections will be taken into consideration while reviewing the development application.

  16. Joan Elizabeth Nimmo commented

    MBRC Planners and Councillors,

    I am a resident of Godwin Beach. I wish to object the Material Change of Use application for 1 Esplanade, Godwin Beach on the following planning grounds:

    1. The proposed use is not supported under the current planning scheme.
    2. Insufficient detail is provided by the proponent in relation to traffic management.
    3. The proponent provide insufficient detail in relation to the developments impact on infrastructure such as stormwater and sewer management. In particular, the impact of hard stand to nearby mangroves.
    4. The application provides no or insufficient detail in relation to the environmental impact of their application. In particular, the impact on migrating birds, rare and endangered wildlife located in an import nursery habitat.
    5. The proposed application provides insufficient setback to waterway and adjoining properties.
    6. The proposed change of use is not in keeping with adjoining residential and rural land use.
    7. The proposal provides insufficient provision for refuse management and collection.

    While I am a strong supporter of development in this region, this proposal fails the test of good development and is far from being Eco friendly.

  17. Beth commented

    I strongly object to this development based mainly on the ecological impact it will have. This area has been identified as a significant roost area for international migratory shorebirds including the Eastern Curlew which is listed as an Endangered species in Queensland under the Nature Conservation Act 1992 (Queensland) September 2017 list . (Refer Australian Government website link :
    http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/publicspecies.pl?taxon_id=847 and MBRC document reference : Moreton Bay Regional Council Shorebird Habitat Mapping Project by David Milton and Jill Denning , Report No. 640/1-20-5P , 30 June 2009. And this is just one example of the significance of the area!
    There has been no public consultation and no impact study undertaken by an independent body. Both need to happen BEFORE any application is considered.

  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