Festival site developers fight $15m council bill in court

Queensland's Deputy Premier Jarrod Bleijie has criticised the Sunshine Coast Council for charging a developer more than $15 million in "outrageous" infrastructure fees for a controversial festival site that he called in and approved.

Coochin Creek Property, owned by the Comiskey Group, earlier this month lodged an appeal in the Planning and Environment Court, calling the infrastructure charges notice "irrational".

The Comiskey Group, run by brothers Rob and David Comiskey, owns businesses across south-east Queensland including Eaton's Hill Hotel, Sandstone Point Hotel, The Imperial Hotel, and The Doonan.

Sunshine Coast Council issued the developers an infrastructure charges notice on May 9 in relation to their proposed Coochin Creek Property, on Roys Road, 6 kilometres east of the Bruce Highway, and a 30-minute drive from Mooloolaba.

The notice included a levied charge to the developers of $15,145,209.

'Irrational and unreasonable'

In its submission to the court, the Comiskey Group argued the Coochin Fields festival development would not generate extra demand on "trunk infrastructure" to that extent.

"The amount of the levied charge is so unreasonable that no reasonable local government could have imposed that amount," the court documents read.

"The calculation of the levied charge is irrational and lacks a proper foundation."

The Comiskey Group also argued council's notice should have included more specifics regarding which trunk infrastructure network would be affected, and how.

Mr Bleijie, who approved the outdoor festival event site after council initially rejected it, said the state government supported the project and the eco-tourism opportunities it would provide the Sunshine Coast.

"I approved and called that project in because I wanted it to proceed, not for it to be held up in court or not proceed because of outrageous council charges,"

Mr Bleijie said.

Sunshine Coast Council and the Comiskey Group both declined to comment due to the case being before court.

No hearing date has been set.

Negotiation not uncommon

Rachel Gallagher, a property development expert from Griffith University, defined trunk infrastructure as that which a local government identified as necessary for the growth of that area.

"[Trunk infrastructure is] your transport network, roads, bikeway networks, footpaths, water supply, sewerage, parks, community facilities," Dr Gallagher said.

"Generally speaking, any new development in an area that's undeveloped will generate more demand on infrastructure."

She said the extent of the demand would depend on the intensity of the use, how frequently it had events, visitor numbers, the duration of events, and existing infrastructure.

"There is probably an argument that if you're doing a development that's unforeseen by council, then there's an existential question about whether council should be footing any bill,"

Dr Gallagher said.

According to Dr Gallagher, developers did not have to pay the infrastructure charges until the project was complete, and the money did not go specifically to their development but rather to a pool of money which council could use for development infrastructure costs within its capital works program.

For larger, more controversial developments, Dr Gallagher said it was common for developers to negotiate costs.

"Developers will try and get as much of a deal they can out of the local and state governments," she said.

At the Coochin Fields festival site, she pointed to the one road in and out and the ongoing maintenance costs.

"Roads need to be safe enough so that we know if there's a rain event, or anything like that, people can get in and out, or if there's emergency services that need to get in and out," Dr Gallagher said.

"It's going to put extra demand on that infrastructure."

The industry expert believes the case signified a greater need for transparency between all levels of government, developers, and the general public.

Email address