Logan & Albert Conservation Association



Related Articles


MIRVAC _ submission template - closes Monday 19 Dec 2016

Last Updated on 30 April 2017

Reasons for objecting to concept plan as presented are summarised below. They are extracted from the whole document file you can download



docxMap of proposed site 

  1. Application for Area 1 in Southwest corner is partial only. Explain that all 3 areas should be considered together - see pdf file above
  2. Value of dam
  3. Rare and threatened species on whole property
  4. EPBC protected species - spotted tail quolls (Endangered), koalas (Vulnerable), grey-headed flying foxes (Vulnerable), greater gliders (Vulnerable)
  5. Queensland NCA listed species - glossy black cockatoos (Vulnerable), powerful owls (Vulnerable), wallum froglet (Vulnerable), tusked frog (Vulnerable) 
  6. Logan City Council threatened species – wallum froglet, tusked frog, yellow-bellied gliders, powerful owls, glossy black cockatoos
  7. Large mobs of eastern grey kangaroos (over 100+ individuals) and red neck wallabies on site utilise water sources and grass areas for feeding. Macropods are known to move from grass areas to woodland/forested areas. There have been no surveys of macropods undertaken in the Environmental Assessment. AREA 1 and the whole property has very significant value to Macropod species known to exist onsite (100+) 
  8. The environmental values of this 482 hectare property (the largest land holding in the area and local landscape) provides a critical stepping stone in the landscape, fauna movement corridors that cannot be replaced in this location offsets will never compensate for the loss of this environmental asset.  

    “ the subject site remains one of the last large rural properties in the immediate landscape predominantly comprised of rural residential development” (Saunders Havill Group MIRVAC TECHNICAL ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT p 3) 


Vegetation Management (Reinstatement) Bill

Last Updated on 30 April 2017

EXTENSION for deadline for submissions on the Vegetation Management (Reinstatement) Bill to

 Friday 29 April 2016! - update provided by The Environmental Defenders Office Qld.

Please, get your submission to the Committee before next Friday (and let EDO know if you sent one in). 
To make it easy for you, EDO have prepared a basic template you can use as a base for your submission. Remember to take out and fill in all of the highlighted sections as described. The Environmental Defenders Office Qld have also put together a list of key points we suggest you include. Check out  website here.
Key points we suggest you could include in your submissions:
  • Who you or your group are, what are your objectives and any case examples about land clearing
  • Reasons why you care about protecting our vegetation – e.g. do you care about:
    • protecting koalas, or other threatened species of concern to you;
    • the impact of tree clearing on  increasing drought in our already drought stricken state – it has now been proven that the more trees we have, the more rain we have;
    • the impact of tree clearing on climate change  – tree clearing causes millions of tonnes of CO2 to be released into our atmosphere;
    • tree clearing near catchments can cause land erosion and run off into our river catchments – the erosion and run off caused by clearing along the Great Barrier Reef catchment banks is a leading cause of impacts to our Reef; or
    • any other issues you are concerned about that are relevant to your area.
  • Support the passing of the bill, to protect Queensland’s ecosystems and wildlife. This bill is important particularly because it:
  • reinstates the protection of high value regrowth on freehold and indigenous land;
  • removes provisions which permit clearing applications for high value agriculture and irrigated agriculture;
  • broadens protection of riparian vegetation, especially in the Great Barrier Reef catchments of Burnett Mary, Eastern Cape York and Fitzroy Great Barrier Reef;
  • reinstates the application of the riverine protection permit framework to the destruction of vegetation in a watercourse, lake or spring; and
  • reinstates a broader requirement for environmental offsets to be required for any residual impact, not just ‘significant’ impacts as is currently provided for in offsets legislation (and has led to only 1 offset being registered for vegetation impacts since 2014).

A hand written letter or text document can be posted / faxed to 07 3553 6699 / emailed to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Postal address Research Director
                      Agriculture and Environment Committee
                      Parliament House
                      BRISBANE QLD 4000

Submissions must include:

  • the author’s name and signature
  • if the submission is made on behalf of an organisation, the level of approval (e.g. a local branch, executive committee or national organisation)
  • mailing address (and email if available)
  • daytime telephone number
    • support bill WWF To have this significant legislation re-instated is vitally important for the future well-being of the land and all species and ecosystems that rely on a healthy forested landscape.  CLICK ON WWF image above to make your submission online to your local state MP. Not all members of the opposition  - or independants - are opposed to re-instatement of this legislation. It is also an opportunity extend the legislation to close loopholes. As WWF point out The VMROLA Bill is already a significant compromise. Damaging loopholes remain and should be closed.
      • Most exemptions will remain, in particular the urban exemption.
      • The reliance on self-assessable codes introduced in 2013 is retained.
      • The ability to withhold incriminating evidence of illegal clearing from the prosecution is retained.
      • 22 million hectares of bushland made exempt on property maps will continue to be open to repeated clearing regardless it may fall in stream buffer zones, endangered ecosystems, habitat for threatened species and high slopes.
    • However brief - please make a submission to support the re-instatement of this vegetation protection legislation.

Ratifying the TPP with ISDS inclusions will not be in Australia’s national interest

Last Updated on 13 March 2016

Ratifying the TPP with ISDS inclusions will not be in Australia’s national interest......

4 days left to HAVE YOUR SAY ie make a submission to the Senate sub-committee due this Friday 11 March 2016.

A Senate committee is about to assess whether the TPP, Trans Pacific Partnership, as it stands, is ‘in the national interest’. The Turnbull Government will then put forward legislation to ‘ratify’ the TPP. If this is then approved by a majority in the Senate, Australia will be stuck with this agreement for longer than most of our lifetimes.

Submissions can be emailed directly to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.Submissions are ultimately all about numbers.

LACA believes this "FREE TRADE" agreement is the most dangerous and immediate threat to our capacity to protect the environment from climate change, and future bad development decisions. With its toxic Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) provision in the Trans Pacific Partnership agreement our country's ability to make decisions can be challenged by a corporation and go to trial at an offshore international tribunal.

In order to assist you LACA has a prepared a question and answer backgrounder for those not familiar with this issue. Read it here docxTransPacificPartnership_QuestionandAnswer.docx

Brief one page summary submission for a quick cut and paste and send today docxTPP-ISDS_Submission-brief.docx

There is also a longer more detailed document if you prefer docxTPP_Submission-to-JSCOT.docx

Please send your submission to the Senate Committee before this coming Friday 11 March, letting the Senate committee know that you do not see the TPP with ISDS inclusions as even remotely ‘in Australia’s national interest’.

HAVE YOUR SAY on this critically important matter.

Submissions can be emailed directly to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it." target="_blank">

LACA has been writing about this issue for several years. If you are new to the issue search for TPP in the search function of thsi website.

In addition EDO provides some useful links at http://www.edoqld.org.au/news/have-your-say-on-the-tpp/


Better Planning for Queensland - submission (2)

Last Updated on 26 November 2015

Submission on Directions Paper: Better Planning for Queensland
Comments close 23 October 2015

act now      Submit via email to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 


It is disappointing that Logan citizens were denied an opportunity to attend a local workshop with planners to gain better understanding of what the discussion paper means and its implications for future planning in Queensland.

Logan and Albert Conservation Association LACA exec members have shared concerns with the Environmental Defenders Office Qld EDQ, Queensland Conservation Council QCC, Friends of South-east Queensland group FOSEQ and Redlands 2030 who have each put together some very detailed and substantial documents  for which we can also endorse support.

To illustrate three issues for protection Greenspace, Koala Habitat and Coastal Protection are missing from Planning Bills.

"Greenspace, Koala Habitat and Coastal Protection are missing" -  BREC Brisbane Region Environment Council contact Ted Fensom

Please compose a brief submission - using any of the issues from LACA's submission which is attached. Please personalise as issues relate to you -or you are most concerned about.

pdfSubmission-on-Directions-Paper_BetterPlanningforQueensland_LACA_web.pdf351.05 KB22/10/2015, 13:35

The words of Edward Burke  "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing" serve to remind us that silence on an issue is construed as its support.  When economic gain surpasses and overrides significant social and planetary wellbeing those concerned must raise their voices. 

BREC advises us of the following concerns:

The Greenspace provisions and green fauna infrastructure have been left out of the initial bill, provision of the ranges of parklands, trails, open space, and bushland, are largely no longer defined or compulsory, and six different programs covering a wider range of greenspace including recreation reserves, inter urban breaks and National Reserve System largely no longer exist. The future greenspace of Queensland will have to be subsidised by Ratepayers as the UDIA Policy is "no more contributions".
New Residential Infrastructure capping gaps in some cities will also have to be subsidised by Ratepayers. This fast track legislation trashing of decades of integrated interagency planning, environmental advice and public consultation is a developers dream he said . "This is a return to the 1980s Planning."


INQUIRY into Register of Environmental Organisations

Last Updated on 23 April 2015

The Committee is inquiring into the administration, transparency and effectiveness of the Register of Environmental Organisations under the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997.

nature needs voiceOn Thursday 26 March 2015 the Committee adopted an inquiry referred by the Minister for the Environment, the Hon Greg Hunt MP, asking the Committee to inquire into and report on the Register of Environmental Organisations.The Committee invites interested persons and organisations to make submissions

addressing the terms of reference by 21 May 2015.

For information on how to make a submission, go to our Making a submission to a Committee Inquiry page.

Additional useful information can be found on the Notes to help those intending to make a submission to a parliamentary committee inquiry page.

The House of Representatives Standing Committee on the Environment will inquire into and report on the administration and transparency of the Register of Environmental Organisations (the Register) and its effectiveness in supporting communities to take practical action to improve the environment.

Terms of Reference: 


Opportunity to comment on the Draft River Recovery plan

Last Updated on 23 July 2014

Opportunity to comment on the Logan City Draft River Wetlands Recovery Plan 2013 - 2023  closes Friday 30 May 2014


Logan City Council's Draft Logan Rivers and Wetlands Recovery Plan 2013-2023 is a Council document that will guide and facilitate the Plan Vision:
"Working together to support healthy rivers and wetlands that sustain Logan’s culture, lifestyle and livelihood" 
This vision is to be achieved through three strategic outcomes which support community connection and stewardship; sustainable, best practice industry and innovation; and building the health and resilience of our waterway assets

Read 2 documents from this link: http://lcc-consult.objective.com/portal/environment__sustainability/riverrecovery?tab=files


 Logan and Albert Conservation Association (LACA) commends the Council on its plan for river and wetlands recovery. The underpinning strategy of re-engaging the community with Logan’s rivers and their associated waterways is very sound and is deliverable over time through the beautification and access/engagement actions outlined in the Plan. 

LACA does, however, have concerns related to the ongoing implementation of the plan with respect to rebuilding the natural values of the waterways. 
These concerns are:  
1. Current restoration practice on Slacks Creek, where extended areas of creek bank vegetation are being entirely removed and replanted in one action.  
Clearing of weeds must be staged in order to retain biodiversity values along these sites over the restoration period, limit damage and erosion along to creek banks resulting from intense storm events (as has already occurred along a 200 metre stretch at Timothy Park). 
In this respect much of the current restoration practice to date along Slacks Creek lacks consistency with the Recovery Plan’s Strategic Outcome 3: ‘Delivering iconic demonstration projects’. 
2. The reference to the use of offsetting as a means of building/securing riparian corridors. 
Offsetting represents a net loss of biodiversity across the city landscape. It is unacceptable to LACA to allow the sacrifice of one ecologically valuable natural area with the objective of securing another through an ‘offset process. Each area has unique ecological values and functions which cannot be replaced, and each must be strongly protected through regulation, not commodified and monetised to enable a landscape ‘transaction’ process to occur. 
Furthermore, Council’s ‘ecological significance scoring’ – which provides the basis for calculating the ‘cost’ of offsetting -  has been demonstrated by LACA (see submissions to the DLPS) to be significantly flawed and anomalous, due to Council’s failure to use the second stage  ‘expert panel’ process to finesse 2007 BAMM derived GIS mapping data. This failure of due process has been exacerbated by unwillingness on the part of Council to build a genuine database by funding long term fauna/flora survey work across Logan. 
3. Loss of valuable wetland area under the 2014 Planning Scheme: 
LACA has noted that the area of the Loganholme Wetlands under Conservation Zone 11 in the 2006 planning scheme has been reduced in the 2014 Draft Planning Scheme – with certain private properties and other Council-owned areas now not covered by a conservation overlay. The removal of a conservation overlay from the private properties off Beenleigh Redland bay Road appears to be related to allowing full property development to occur off an extended Vincent Street. 
Towards the river, Logan Water – not known for its environmental sensitivity - now has control of a large area of the wetlands. 
The adjacent Council-owned section is proposed as an ‘animal safari’ site. Since this is 67% flood prone, Council may be inclined to allow filling of this site for the proposed safari zoo. 
LACA asserts that these roll-backs of conservation intent across this important Logan River wetland are entirely inconsistent with the positive aspirations expressed in the ‘Strategic outcomes’ statement in Council’s Draft River Recovery Plan:
ENVIRONMENTAL: ‘The health and resilience of our creeks and wetlands has improved’ and ‘Desired regional outcomes and policies: Targets include restoring ecosystem health and ecological processes to waterways and maintaining and increasing wetland condition.’
 To be consistent with Draft River Recovery Plan aspirations such as ‘With increasing pressure on our waterways, it is essential we protect, enhance and celebrate these natural assets’, LACA would urge Council to begin building a complete inventory of the associated waterways and wetlands which are crucial to the success of the plan.
In this respect LACA would see, for example, the inclusion and priority protection of Jerry’s Downfall/Flesser’s Reserve; Ferry Road Carbrook wetland to the river; Reidel Road Carbrook wetland to the river; Serpentine Creek to the river south of Beenleigh Redland Bay Road to the river; Loganholme wetlands to the river. Other associated wetlands and creek systems need to be identified and added to the inventory. 
Of particular concern to LACA are the rollbacks of environmental protection discussed above and the threat of major road construction through Jerry’s Downfall and the general use of this and other wetland areas as corridors for power and other infrastructure.  
All wetland and waterway areas need to be identified and prioritised for protection and ultimate ‘enhancement’ as part of the River Recovery process, before the Logan Planning Scheme is formally adopted.
The proposed use of offsetting to build and secure corridors along the city’s waterways must also be discussed.
Advice and provision of sound ecological advice around cost effective strategies which will help maintain biodiversity values both during and beyond the restoration stage must be secured from experts in the field - outside of council eg .  Logan and Albert Conservation Association (LACA).
Postal address:
General comments: Use above information as a guide / suggestion for what you can say
Do you want feedback and preferred method.
If you require further information regarding this project or form, please contact council by:
Phone: (07) 3412 3412  Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.">
Council website for this CONSULTATION requires people to ‘register’ which is a bit of a nuisance and may put you off because you have to fiddle around.  To get around this council staff person Britt Rogers is happy to take the submissions directly to her email, so perhaps you and others could just send  submissions to her -  This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.">
Council has done a great job with this recovery plan - aside from the reservations LACA mentions above.  We should tell them. Remember the summit from a few years ago? this is part of the outcome.

Koala Conservation in Logan - comment by Friday 16 May

Last Updated on 16 May 2014

 Logan City is home to a significant koala population and has one of the world’s largest koala conservation centres located at Daisy Hill Conservation Park. This facility is a Queensland state government conservation park. The social and economic value of koalas to our city and nation is difficult to quantify however, it is undoubtedly significant. This Koala Conservation Strategic Plan aims to ensure the long-term viability of koalas in Logan City and demonstrates Council’s commitment to koala conservation over the long term. How well does Logan do it now and will koalas in Logan and surrounding areas be protected by implementing this 10 year strategic plan 2013-2023?

                                     Have your say on the Koala Conservation Strategic Plan by completing the online survey before Friday 16 May 2014.

The link to this survey is  http://lcc-consult.objective.com/portal/environment__sustainability/lkcsp?tab=info

For more information you can email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or phone 3412 44 91

Although there is no direct invitation - you can also email your submission to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Online process will probably close at 5pm. Please send any late submissions also. Remember to include name/s and address/es of submitter/s and signing is preferred. You can also email cThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

You will need to read this document  http://www.logan.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/287691/2014-Logans-Koala-Conservation-Strategy.pdf to be able to comment on the 4 strategic outcomes - 28 page document with captivating images of koalas.

 In summary, the plan is based on achieving the following key strategic outcomes:

• SO 1 – Improved science of koala ecology and habitat requirements in Logan;

In Logan, koalas are most frequently sighted in the eastern suburbs of the city including Daisy Hill, Shailer Park, Carbrook, Priestdale and Cornubia. Residents of Greenbank, Logan Village, Browns Plains especially Berrinba Sanctuary, Jimboomba, Munruben, Mundoolan and others will not agree.

It is important to note that current data on koala presence in Logan is mostly anecdotal and not a result of targeted scientific surveys. Council has little knowledge of koalas from former Beaudesert areas and as there have been no funded onground field studies, residents reported sightings are regarded as "anecedotal". 
• SO 2 – Increased quality protected koala habitat in Logan;

To achieve a net increase in koala habitat in the city and South East Queensland it is essential that a regional approach is undertaken and areas of koala habitat are connected through ecological corridors.

• SO 3 – Improved koala safety and health;

Logan City is expected to grow by more than 200,000 residents over the next 20 years and beyond. Logan City will continue to be one of the fastest growing areas in Queensland with dramatically increasing urban development and increasing pressure on the natural environment and koala habitat.

• SO 4 – Increased positive community engagement and awareness of koala conservation actions.

To achieve the strategic outcomes of this Plan it is essential that it is supported by an active, engaged and supportive community including residents, land owners, businesses and the Development industry  

 The online survey basically asks you to answer same 4 questions about each outcomes

1.       Are these actions the right actions to ....                                

2.       Are there any actions that need to be changed to .....

3.       Are there any additional actions you think we should be doing?

4.       What ideas do you have to support the delivery of these actions?

and finally any extra comments. Please consider a submission regarding any point / points you are concerned about.

These could include - 

Importance of using best possible and latest mapping. ie SEQCatchments Koala Habitat Map for  Logan - with Regrowth map and Observations, Genome Barrier and  Pinch Point Maps as has been done for Brisbane City Council.

Koala policies, programs, zones, map layers  and legislation  should be included in town plan  not merely as offsets opportunities

Undertake and publish Natural Areas Management Plans 

Invest in Koala Research 

Use citizen scientist programs like Great Koala Count to track sightings and include results in mapping

Develop stronger land stewardship programs with community to reward incentivise residents to retain and extend bushland habitat.

Place higher value on existing habitat with existing koala populations being retained in perpetuity for wildlife ie such areas are not suitable for industry and housing developments. Rezoning of such land at Browns Plains for conservation is critical if Logan wants to consider itself - and be considered by others as a "proactive koala-friendly" community

Educating community on living with wildlife - especially koalas has to be a high priority to remove any misconceptions that exist 


Koalas in SEQ are not protected and there in no connectivity not in Logan's new planning. The new Queensland Government SPP is a disaster for koalas and wildlife.

DECLARATION as ENDANGERED is needed. It won't happen unless community makes it happen!!

Please send your submission asap 

Your choice to complete online - or write your signed submission and send to

Chief Executive Officer
Logan City Council
PO Box 3226
Logan City DC Qld 4114

or email to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it." target="_blank">

While both Logan and state government support an OFFSET scheme to "pay for" koala habitat to be cleared, neither Logan and Albert Conservation Association LACA nor Australian Koala Foundation AKF supports a general offset policy,

LACA's document http://www.laca.org.au/images/Planning_Scheme_Environmental_Submission_writing_kit.5points_docx.pdf also has some points relevant to Koala Conservation Strategy

The Australian Koala Foundation has recently requested a change to Australia’s environmental offset system, which poses serious issues for the conservation of koalas. The current system allows the government to approve environmentally damaging building projects if the business pledges to make up for destruction of native habitat by providing similar habitat elsewhere. Deforestation has led to the decline in the genetic diversity of koalas, but has also increased disturbance, injury, stress, and competition for food or territory due to overcrowding. It also creates barriers that prevent koalas from roaming for mating purposes, and the addition of another habitat does not even ensure that koalas will migrate there.


The koala is considered a threatened species in three parts of Australia, but their habitat is being destroyed by removing irreplaceable foliage that they depend on. The destruction of native habitat creates major gaps or breaks across the koalas’ landscape. A recent study from the University of Queensland revealed the importance of maintaining at least 30% of forest land to ensure the koalas' survival. Results point to the importance of the species access to wide landscapes, because habitat isolation can threaten genetic diversity which is necessary to conservation. Researchers found that genetic diversity “dropped rapidly” once the country’s amount of forest land fell under 30%. It is important that the Australian government take measures to increase the amount of forest land to a level suitable for conserving the rapidly declining species koalas.

 Many thanks to all the wildlife carers who rescue rehabilitate and release - from turtles to owls to koalas and kangaroos. They are always confronted with issue - where to they release and they are required to relocate to home territories of each animal. Will this endanger the wildlife - koala or other again. Lets reduce the risk by having a good conservation strategy - with teeth - in our town planning. Up to us to ask. Council does not have all the answers.


Concerned about mining activities in Queensland?

Last Updated on 30 March 2014

EDO-mining-submissonAfter pressure from EDO Qld last year, the Queensland government was stopped from rushing through changes to your rights without due process. Now, this year, the Queensland government released the 'Mining Lease Notification & Objection discussion paper'. The discussion paper - currently open for public submission - outrageously proposes to restrict community rights to object to mining applications and proposes in effect that up to 90% ofmining projects will have no public notification at all.

EDO has prepared documentation that you may like to consider when making a valid submission. It is important to include name and address of persons making the submission and usually a signature is required.

Read the government's paper here


Making submissions

 Please read the Mining lease notification and objection initiative — discussion paper before making your submission. Submissions close at 5.00pm, Friday 28 March 2014.  

It is intended submissions will be provided to the Office of Best Practice Regulation in support of Regulatory Impact System consideration. If you wish to remain anonymous, this should be clearly noted on your submission.

Submissions can be made by email or post.

By email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. (subject Mining Lease Notification and Objection Initiative)

By mail: 
MQRA Program Team
Department of Natural Resources and Mines
Level 7, 61 Mary Street, Brisbane
PO Box 15216
City East, Brisbane, QLD 4001

The government says that out of about 100 mining lease applications each year, about 10% are declared to be high risk.[5] This means that for 90% of mining projects in Queensland, there will be no community submission and objection rights at all. What’s more, there will be no public notification of these ‘lower risk’ projects so you may not even be aware they are underway.

There is nothing in the paper about how the government intends to address the cumulative impacts of many hundreds if not thousands of ‘low risk’ mining projects take place across Queensland.

I’m concerned about what is being proposed, what can I do?

Everyone has the right to send written submissions to the State Government.

The submission deadline is 28 March 2014.

Download EDO sample submission. This is a docx document. Contact Logan and Albert Conservation Association LACA Vice President at kfaldt@gmail if you require format doc 

 As with any development be it mining, resources, agriculture, environmental and living, it impacts on all of us in one way or another. The stewardship of any country is the responsibility of the whole community and certainly, not just the government of the day". Quote by Central Queensland Grazier



State Planning Policy feedback - KRAs and other topics

Last Updated on 08 June 2013

The draft SPP State Planning Policy identifies the state's interests in planning and development and how these are to be dealt with in planning instruments, council development assessment processes and in designating land for community infrastructure.

It will provide the tools to empower and support local governments to make the right planning decisions for their community and to implement state interests in the way that best suits their community needs.

An integrated mapping system is being developed to visually represent the state's interests and will be available with the final SPP, which is expected to come into effect in the second half of this year.

18state-interests-within-draft-SPP five-categoriesHaving your say - by Wednesday 12 June

As a statutory consultation process, the Minister must consider all submissions, so the best way for people to make their views known is through a formal written submission.

To provide a properly made submission you are required to:
- include the name and residential or business address of the submitter
- be made in writing, and unless submitted electronically, must be signed by each person who has made the submission.

Forward your submission to:
Post: State Planning Policy feedback
Department of State Development, Infrastructure and Planning
Reply Paid 15009
City East Brisbane QLD 4002
Fax: +61 7 3237 1812
Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
You can also continue to speak directly to the SPP team regarding your concerns through the dedicated email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. and/or hotline 1800 600 163.

Designating land for community infrastructure includes such projects as power infrastructure eg POWERLINK's multi million dollar line to mining operations was deemed to be community infrastructure as is the SFRC Southern Freight Rail Corridor

Economic growth government believes will come from

          • Agriculture
          • Development and construction
          • Mining and extractive resources - includes 5 KRAs in SRRC. Policy seeks to avoid and manage current and potential land use conflicts. An anomalous situation as this sector conflicts with ecotourism and farming.
          • Tourism

How will the KRAs impact on the program known as National Landscapes ? Managed by Tourism Australia and Parks Australia, the National Landscapes program focuses on the development and marketing of Australia's 15 most significant, world class natural areas. The program aims to provide visitors with new and engaging experiences to increase visitation, dispersal and length of stay within Australia's most unique natural environments. Queensland's three National Landscapes include the World Heritage listed Wet Tropics, the Great Barrier Reef and Australia's Green Cauldron (more commonly known as the Gondwana Rainforest Reserves of Australia on the Queensland and New South Wales border)  in Scenic Rim.

It is challenging to see how all these policies including the SEQ Koala Conservation SPP 2/10 can be improved by a single policy.

Have your say on any aspect of this draft policy. 

Information about KRAs is available here pdfKRA_spp_2_07__training_handout_aug07.pdf

Read our LACA Logan and Albert Conservation Association 2011 objection to Kerry Quarry application - not approved by council and later withdrawn by applicant here pdfLACA-QUARRY-OBJECTION2011.pdf838.82 KB


New and expanded KRAs proposed in Scenic Rim and Logan

Last Updated on 23 May 2013

Have your say - until 12 June 2013

KRAS-IN-RELATION-TO-BEAUDESERTLocal governments, the community and other stakeholders are encouraged to have their say on the draft State Planning Policy (SPP) prior to it being finalised later this year.

65 pages of important reading if you care about the

future of SEQ - and Queensland 

KRAs are just one 'policy' to be included in SINGLE POLICY to

replace many!

The Kerry Quarry - SRRC rejected in 2012 - has been proposed as the Erin View Key Resource Area ( KRA 140) in addition to several other quarry KRAs for the SRRC and Logan City council areas, including: Markwell Creek Rd KRA 142, Cryna KRA 139, Yore Road KRA 143 ( 3 km south of Clutha Creek KRA), Kangaroo Mountain KRA 141 ( north of Aratuala in habitat containing at least 3 essential habitat factors for the koala). See attached map of 3 KRAs of Erin View, Markwell Creek and Cryna.

If an area is set aside as a KRA it
- does not give automatic approval rights
- it recognises a state or regional resource
-it may limit or restrict what neighbouring property owners can do on their land ( eg in separation zones and buffers around the KRA itself and transport corridors)
- does not take into account amenity impacts or transport impacts that may occur from the designation of a KRA
- the KRAs should have had significant biodiversity, ecological, conservation, cultural heritage and indigenous values assessed as part of the process for defining the boundaries of a KRA - has this been done? Not in the original MCU application for Kerry Quarry.

Concerns already raised by the Kerry community about the proposed Erin View and Markwell KRAs include -

1. SRRC previously received over 1000 objections from the community for the Kerry Quarry - this MCU ( Material change of Use ) was not approved by SRRC in 2011/12.

The community is asking for SRRC to continue to support community and to

say no to this state government draft.

2. Residents and QAG Quarry Action Group have approached some SRRC councillors - the councillors are saying this is not a local government matter , but a state govt matter. If this is designated a KRA, then SRRC will be responsible for placing conditions on the development. Previous experience with Cryna and Clutha Creek Sands Quarries, is that councils do not follow up conditions, or the applicant can apply for reduced conditions. This has been the case with Cryna Quarry.
3. SRRC will be putting in their own submission - local SRRC councillors have said if Kerry Quarry had been a Key Resource Area, the quarry would have been approved last year
4. Transport and haulage routes and impacts on local roads and Beaudesert Township
5. One haulage route being proposed via Markwell Creek with topography that is not suited to truck haulage ( see map attached of KRAs with spearation areas and trans routes)
6. Impact on tourist area (e.g. Kerry) but other areas of Beaudesert may be affected as well
7. Ecological assessment for Kerry Quarry MCU ( Material change of Use) was never done
8. Cultural heritage assessment was never done for Kerry Quarry MCU
9. Concerns that other quarries proposed and extent of area proposed has not been revealed to rest of community
10. Community not advised by SRRC that this was taking place, despite SRRC knowing that the community clearly opposed the Kerry Quarry proposal

Further information coming soon


Page 1 of 6

<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next > End >>
   earth-hour-12  lockthegate    UN decade qcclogo2