Barro Group is appealing Redland City Council’s decision to block development of a quarry approved in 2013 by the LNP.
The Barro Group has appealed against Redland City Council’s recent decision to refuse a three year extension period for development of a large quarry in Mount Cotton.
In a notice of appeal lodged with the Planning and Environment Court on 24 April 2018, the Barro Group wants the Council’s decision to be set aside and Council to pay Barro Group’s appeal costs.
Council says no to a three year extension
The quarry has been a hot topic for many years
Barro Group’s request for a three year extension was refused in a 9/1 vote by the Council at its meeting on 22 March. Cr Murray Elliott was the only councillor present to oppose the refusal. Cr Peter Mitchell was absent from the meeting.
Council’s refusal decision went against the advice of officers. There have been several instances in recent years where officers’ recommendations have been ignored including:
- Teak Lane
- Mt Cotton biomass plant extension period
- Ausbuild’s proposed housing estate at Clay Gully Road in Victoria Point.
Speaking after the meeting Mayor Karen Williams said Council’s refusal of Barro Group’s application was in line with community expectation.
“The quarry extension has been a hot topic in the Redlands for many years and by refusing the application today Council has clearly demonstrated we are standing up for the community,” she said.
Cr Julie Talty said she hoped that Barro Group would lodge a new application for development of its proposed quarry.
“This is a win for the local community and provides the opportunity for a fresh application to be lodged so new residents in the area can have their say about the proposal,” she said.
The Council identified many reasons for refusing the quarry extension application including:
- The proposed extension is actually a new quarry, extracting new material from a different location on the site, with a significantly greater scale than the existing quarry.
- The applicant has failed to demonstrate that the new quarry can be constructed and operated in such a manner as to protect the amenity of the surrounding sensitive receptors [people].
- The proposal adversely impacts on and limits the future enhancement of the surrounding economic tourism opportunities.
- The development will have a significant impact on Mount Cotton Road that may affect pedestrian and vehicular safety on this road. This impact is not suitably mitigated by conditions on the original approval.
- That the population of Mount Cotton, its surrounds and Redland City itself has grown significantly since the original application was subject to public notification in 2012. A number of new dwellings and change of ownership in Mount Cotton and surrounds has occurred during this time. Therefore there is fair degree of non-awareness of the development approval within the surrounding community.
Community has already rejected the quarry
Local residents have been expressing opposition to the Mt Cotton ‘superquarry’ for many years.
Applications for the proposed quarry were knocked back by Council in 2006 and again in 2013.
The 2013 quarry development application resulted in more than 1,200 submissions which raised many issues considered in Council’s refusal of the development application.
The LNP State Government intervened using ministerial call in powers to override the community’s voice. The quarry project was approved by Minister Jeff Seeney on 20 December 2013.
Residents opposing the quarry continue to operate a Facebook page to keep the community informed: Save Mt Cotton No Superquarry
They will be expecting Redland City Council to resolutely defend its decision to quash the quarry.
Redlands2030 – 15 May 2018
Please note: Offensive or off-topic comments will be deleted. If offended by any published comment please email thereporter@redlands2030.net
6 Comments
While we are on corruption, the government should be looking at the Barro Superquarry at Mt Cotton. I for one have always thought that money was involved in Barro getting its application approved. After the ALP kicked out the Newman government they said they would look into all Jeff Seeney’s call ins. I wrote to and got a reply from Jackie Trad’s office, asking when they would start, the reply was not at this time. Well ALP the time is now. Both sides of politics are somehow involved in the Barro application and a CCC or ICAC needs a full investigation to get to the truth. How is it possible that the Redlands council refused it TWICE beat Barro in court TWICE, 11,000 SUBMISSIONS and PETITIONS against with only 25 in favour and the LNP gives them the nod. It in my opinion stinks and the government needs to clear the air.
This from a 1992 report from the chief geologist M L Oflynn, the year Barro bought the quarry. In his 1985 report he goes on, increased dust resulting from plant, drilling equipment, trucks, and blasting represents a potential HEALTH hazard for both workers and affected RESIDENTS. Residents adjacent to quarries may suffer some if not all of the environmental effects of the above to varying degrees, resulting in loss of amenity, and psychological aggravation. He also states that 400-500 mts is considered a minimum desirable distance from pit to housing. I believe Leif is only 200 mts
Did Cr Talty really say she hoped that Barro Group would lodge a new application for development of its proposed quarry.
The people of Mt Cotton might need cotton onto this subtle but nevertheless clear invitation for the Barro group to come back again. Why is the local Councillor playing that game?
Sadly Jason she did say that and shows her lack of knowledge regarding the local community. If she was any sort of Councillor in the 6 years she has been there she has had the chance to advise residents about local issues especially Barro Quarry and its application and the impacts it will have on many families lives. The Quarry has been fined on a few occasions for non complaince, Actually there is very little info in the regular newsletter sent to residents from the Councillor, I think she has forgotton there is Sheldon, Victoria Point, Redlband Bay and Thornlands in her dvision they never get a mention. Why invite the Quarry to reapply, unless behind closed doors she actually supports the quarry.????????
For those who may question the refusal, most of the objections are from the local area. Others are from people who want to protect the environment in Redlands. The locals who objected are well aware of the existing quarry that Barro has been working on, and have not objected to that. This application is for a completely NEW quarry on another block of land to the west of the existing quarry. A block of land which has high environmental values, home for 13 koalas and the head waters of California Creek, which will be affected if the new Quarry goes ahead. It is in a valley and some of the trees are over 400 years old. Sadly Garry Hargraves ex President of Redlands Chamber of Commerce and a few mates bought the block from the farmer and then quickly resold to Barro. Many were shocked to become aware of this as there would be few that could see any value in trashing this precious area. The locals have not complained about the existing quarry, but this new one will have a significant impact on the roads, the plan by Barro is to quarry Grey Wacke a product that will emit high levels of silica dust, and as some families only live 120 metres from the quarry there are real issues regarding air quality. Many may not be aware but there are already 6 quarries in Mt Cotton and another one just adds to the impacts. Rather than encourage the quarry to put in a new application it maybe better for the Council to win the court case and protect the property. Going on the usual public consultation by the local Councillor I don’t hold much faith in the community being informed about any new quarry application.
I was one of the many people who appealed to Jeff Seeney not to grant quarry approval in 2013 before he bluntly ignored the reasons of Redlanders, just as he did with appeals from residents over an irresponsible commercial development by Walker Corp at Toondah Harbour. Seeney has little concern for environment issues or impacts on existing property values. Furthermore the extra semi trailer traffic on already crowded roads was left out of the equation. Seeney should have left the LNP along with Campbell Newman because the residents have twice rejected the LNP in recent Qld elections. We want government and council to respect local values. You can only increase tourism when you respect the region and its natural beauty.