Below is a proforma submission for you to fill in.

This will need to be in before the 17th November.

If you need any more information please go to

or email

contact@takeactionpumicestonepassaage.com.au

[Name]:

[Address]:

Date:

To: The Hon. Jarrod Bleijie MP Deputy Premier,
Minister for State Development, Infrastructure and Planning, and Minister for Industrial Relations
PO Box 15009, City East QLD 4002
deputy.premier@ministerial.qld.gov.au, industrialrelations@ministerial.qld.gov.au

RE: Coochin Creek proposed Tourist Park

Dear Minister,

I/we formally object to the proposed Coochin Creek Tourist Park development. The site directly adjoins the Ramsar-listed Pumicestone Passage, a wetland of international importance protected under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act).

I submit that this proposal is fundamentally inconsistent with State and Regional Planning frameworks, particularly the Northern Inter-Urban Break (NIUB) protections enshrined in the SEQ Regional Plan 2023 and Planning Regulation 2017.

1. Inconsistency with Northern Inter-Urban Break (NIUB) Protections

The proposed development sits wholly within the protected NIUB green belt, which serves as a permanent separation between Sunshine Coast and Moreton Bay urban footprints.

The State Assessment and Referral Agency (SARA) has already recommended refusal on the following grounds:

• No demonstrated economic or public interest
• No unique locational requirement for the project to be within the NIUB.
• Recognised adverse environmental impacts on the surrounding Ramsar wetland and community amenity. Permitting a Big4-style tourist park would set a dangerous precedent for incremental erosion of this strategic green belt.

2. Environmental and Ramsar Obligations

The development directly threatens:

• Water quality and hydrological stability of the Pumicestone Passage through nutrient and sediment runoff from stormwater and greywater systems.
• Habitat integrity for migratory shorebirds protected under JAMBA, CAMBA and ROKAMBA treaties.
• Mangrove, saltmarsh and intertidal ecosystems, which perform critical ecological services under the “no net loss” wetland principle.

No updated Environmental Impact Statement or hydrological modelling appears to have been undertaken since the original 100-site nature-based tourism approval, despite significant intensification of use.

3. Departure from the Intent of Nature-Based Tourism

The original approval for 100 sites was intended as low-impact nature-based tourism. The proposed 150-site development (75 cabins, 75 campsites, swimming pools, water park, and large recreation building) represents a commercial caravan park, not an ecotourism experience.

This scale and built form are inconsistent with the Planning Regulation 2017 definition of nature-based tourism and conflict with the Sunshine Coast Planning Scheme 2014, particularly the:

• Strategic Framework Theme 3: Environment and Landscape
• Biodiversity, Waterways and Wetlands Overlay
• Flood Hazard Overlay

4. Flooding, Stormwater and Coastal Hazard Risks

The site lies within a low-lying floodplain connected to Coochin Creek and the Pumicestone Passage. Intensified development will increase impervious surfaces, exacerbating flood and stormwater risk.

The area is also identified under QCoast2100 as subject to coastal hazard and sea level rise exposure, rendering it unsuitable for semi-permanent accommodation. The proposal must demonstrate full compliance with the State Planning Policy (SPP) 2023 provisions for water quality, stormwater, and flood hazard mitigation. Without this, approval would be contrary to State interest.

5. Traffic, Access and Safety

Roys Road (East) is a narrow rural connector with blind corners, limited shoulders, and two single-lane bridges—one within a flood zone.

A 150-site tourist park could generate potentially over 600 vehicle movements daily, posing safety hazards for residents, tourists, and wildlife. The site’s single ingress/egress in a bushfire-prone area compounds emergency access risks.

6. Community and Cultural Heritage

The Coochin Creek area lies within Gubbi Gubbi and Kabi Kabi Country and holds significant cultural, ecological, and community values.

This proposal would irreversibly alter the peaceful, ecological character of the region. Cultural heritage consultation and environmental due diligence appear insufficient given the sensitivity of the site.

7. Planning Grounds for Refusal

This development should be refused on the following statutory and strategic grounds:

• Conflict with the Sunshine Coast Planning Scheme 2014, including environmental, flooding, and landscape overlays.
• Non-compliance with the State Planning Policy (SPP) 2023 on matters of environmental significance and hazard resilience.
• Inconsistency with the SEQ Regional Plan 2023 protections for the Northern Inter-Urban Break.
• Potential contravention of Australia’s obligations under the EPBC Act regarding Ramsar wetlands and migratory species.

Conclusion

This proposal is the wrong development in the wrong location. It poses unacceptable risks to one of Queensland’s most ecologically important waterways, undermines regional planning integrity, and contradicts the government’s own departmental advice.

I/we therefore respectfully request that the Hon. Deputy Premier refuse the Coochin Creek Tourist Park development application in line with SARA’s recommendation and community expectation.

Yours sincerely,

[NAME]