By Mitch Gaynor
THE developer behind the controversial Coochin Creek festival site is fighting a $15.1 million infrastructure bill from Sunshine Coast Council.
Coochin Creek Property Pty Ltd – part of the Comiskey group of companies – has lodged an appeal in the Planning and Environment Court seeking to overturn or reduce what calls “irrational” an infrastructure charges notice issued after the State Government approved the Roys Road development.
The application for an outdoor music festival and exhibition event site was called in by the Queensland Government in July 2025 and approved by the Minister for State Development, Infrastructure and Planning, Jarrod Bleijie, earlier this year.
However, the company is now challenging a council infrastructure charge of $15.1 million.
In court documents, the developer argues the council’s calculation is fundamentally flawed.
“The calculation of the levied charge is irrational and lacks a proper foundation,” the appeal states.
It further argues information already before council when it issued the notice “demonstrates that the calculation of the levied charge is irrational and lacks a proper foundation”
The appeal claims the council has failed to identify which trunk infrastructure networks would actually experience additional demand because of the development.
The company also argues the charge bears little relationship to the actual impact of the project.
“The levied charge is grossly disproportionate to the demand (if any) that will be generated by the development on the relevant networks,” the appeal states.
The developer argued the approved venue should not be treated in the same way as hotels, bars, nightclubs or accommodation developments when calculating infrastructure charges.
It also argues camping is only an ancillary component of the proposal and may not occur at every event.
The appeal further claims the council’s calculations wrongly assume the development will operate 365 days a year.
The company is asking the court to set aside the infrastructure charges notice, amend it, or return it to council for reconsideration.
The appeal does not challenge the State Government’s approval of the festival site itself. Instead, it focuses solely on the $15.1m infrastructure bill imposed by council following that approval.
Council is yet to lodge any court documents.