State approved Hummock Hill project in QLD rejected by council.

17 May 2018

The Gladstone Regional Council in Queensland this week, have voted to reject a $1.2 billion golf and residential tourist development on Hummock Hill Island.

Having been in planning now for more than a decade, the Pacificus Tourism proposal was said to have offered Queensland its first new integrated resort on the Great Barrier Reef coast in nearly 30 years - since Hamilton Island was developed.

The project received support last year from the state’s Development Minister, who declared it a “prescribed” project, meaning that any decision made at local council level could be overturned by the Coordinator-General. Regardless, the Gladstone Regional Council rejected the development application on the basis that councilors had found 17 grounds for refusal. These included environmental concerns as well as the potential for direct competition with the nearby tourist towns of Agnes Water and 1770.

According to information on the Pacificus website, the project covers an area of 465ha and will eventually feature more than 1,900 houses, cottages and villas. Many of the home sites will be located around a golf course that has not yet been designed.

Pacificus claim the golf course will be “links-style” and “wild” and designed in accordance with the general principles of the Society of Australian Golf Course Architects (SAGCA). No design appointment has been made, but the following statement from the Pacificus Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is sure to arouse interest from said SAGCA members;

An eighteen- hole championship golf course will designed by golf course designers accredited by the Society of Australian Golf Course Architects (SAGCA).

Though disappointed by the decision of the Gladstone Regional Council, Pacificus Tourism is said to remain "fully committed to the project and considering the best way forward to enable the project to proceed."

From an article in the Gladstone Observer, which includes more detail on the council vote and the views of individual councillors;

THE developers behind the $1.2billion Hummock Hill Island resort remain committed to the project despite Gladstone Regional Council rejecting its development application yesterday.

Council officers recommended refusal of Pacificus Tourism's proposed Hummock Hill Island resort, 30km south of Gladstone.

The report from staff told Gladstone Regional Council there were 17 grounds for refusal.

Six of the 17 grounds for refusal were in relation to environmental concerns.

The 465ha master plan area had proposed to incorporate accommodation areas supported by retail and commercial areas including a spa retreat, golf course, sports club, driving range, boat ramp, airstrip, surf lifesaving club and community centres.

After debating the project for nearly an hour, Gladstone Region councillors voted five to four to reject the proposal.

The main concerns surrounding the development related to its potential to be in direct competition with the key tourist areas of Agnes Water and Seventeen Seventy.

In May last year it was declared a "prescribed project" by State Development Minister Dr Anthony Lynham.

The status gives the Coordinator-General the power to overturn any decision made by Gladstone Regional Council.

A Pacificus Tourism spokesman said despite the "disappointing" decision by the council, the company was considering the best way forward to proceed with the project.

"Since 2005, we have gained all the necessary State and Federal environmental approvals to develop a world-class tourism development on Hummock Hill Island just outside of Gladstone," he said.

"During this time, Gladstone Regional Council have been fully informed and consulted on the project, which is why today's result is so disappointing."

Gladstone Region Mayor Matt Burnett said while it had been approved by the state government, the council's responsibility was to ensure it adhered to the region's planning scheme.

"It's no secret the Queensland Government support this project overwhelmingly and so do the Federal Government," Cr Burnett said.

"This is a planning application that council decides and it doesn't meet the planning scheme by any stretch of the imagination."