$10 Million State Funding for Rockhampton Road Train Access

Bill Byrne, Member for Rockhampton, has recently confirmed that the Rockhampton Region is set to receive $10M in funding from the Queensland Government’s State Infrastructure Plan to support Stage 1 of the Rockhampton Road Train Access upgrade.[1]

Bill Byrne has commented that “with this commitment we will be able to see the upgrade of both intersections at Moores Creek Road and Mushgrave [sic] Street and Queen Elizabeth Drive and Lakes Creek Road (Bridge Street) intersection.”[2]

The completion of Stage 1 of the Rockhampton Road Train Access upgrade will enable road trains to easily navigate through Rockhampton to the abattoirs and “ultimately save the industry time and increase freight efficiency”.[3]

With an economic study of Rockhampton’s Road Train Access completed and a route identified, construction works are due to commence in the first half of 2017.[4]

While this State funding announcement is welcomed news and will bring many benefits to the Rockhampton Region and the local industries, Rees R & Sydney Jones understands that local homeowners and landowners may have concerns about the proposed route and how the future plans of the Rockhampton Beef Loop Road (also referred to as the Rockhampton Ring Road or Rockhampton By-Pass) may impact on their properties.

If you have any queries or if you are approached by a government department or receive a notification outlining that your land or property is going to be resumed or taken, please do not hesitate to contact our Rural, Mining and Gas Partner, Melanie Findlay on (07) 4927 6333. Melanie has local experience in resumption matters and is happy to assist you to understand the resumption process and your rights.

Melanie’s previous article on “Uncertainty over Rockhampton’s Beef Loop Road“, may also be of interest to you.

References

[1] Melanie Plane , ‘VIDEO: $10M Rockhampton road train access proposed route‘, The Morning Bulletin; Queensland Government, ‘ Palaszczuk Government’s vision for Fitzroy infrastructure released‘ (Media Release, 13 March 2016).

[2] Melanie Plane , ‘VIDEO: $10M Rockhampton road train access proposed route‘, The Morning Bulletin.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Frazer Pearce, ‘POLL: What do you think of the proposed road train route?‘, The Morning Bulletin.

Landowner rights restored by the State, but now the Federal Government may have go!

Late last year the State Government passed the MERCP Bill which took away the rights of various community groups, landowners and persons concerned. To put it simply the bill made it hard or impossible for anyone other than a directly affected landowner to object to an Application for a Mining Lease or an Environmental Authority. The bill was passed but never came into effect.  Last month a Bill revoked s47D of the State Development and Public Works Organisation Act 1971 which restored objection rights to coordinated projects.

 The Federal Government now is making noises that they want to remove the legal right for persons other than those directly affected to object to approvals.  This would cause the same problems and reaction that the removal of the rights at a state level caused.  A landowner should be able to object to a coal mine if they are not directly affected by the Mining Lease but their Water Source is going to be impaired. A landowner should be able to object to a project if the dust impacts outside of the mining lease are going to cause health issues.

 Hopefully the Federal Government reviews the consultations that took place when the Queensland government considers this issue. Landowners would be well advised to speak to their members and federal representatives about their concerns on this issue.

Melanie Oliver the Rural, Mining & Gas Partner at local law firm Rees R & Sydney Jones.  If you have any questions, please contact Melanie on 4927 6333.

Changes to Restricted Land Laws may diminsh Landowner Rights

 On 5 June 2014 the Mineral and Energy Resources (Common Provisions) Bill 2014 was presented to Parliament.  If the Bill becomes law then there will be a variety of amendments to the current laws, which will diminish the rights of Landowners when they are negotiating or dealing with a mining company.

What are the current rights of Landholders in regard to Restricted Land?

At the moment, a Mining Lease can be granted over Land that is "Restricted Land" only if the owner of the land gives consent to the application for the Mining Lease. "Restricted Land" means land that is within 100m of permanent buildings used for accommodation or business, community or recreational buildings. It also means land within 50m of a bore, dam, some water storage facilities, cemeteries or burial places or a principal stockyard.

 Currently, what happens if the Landowner won't give consent?

If a Landowner won't give consent, then the application cannot be granted over the "Restricted Land" areas. A Landowner with a property that had Restricted Land was therefore put in better bargaining position with a Mining Company.

 Are there changes in how Restricted Land is treated if the Bill becomes law?

Yes. The Bill proposes changes in the types of infrastructure used to identify Restricted Land. Only land within a "prescribed distance" of certain types of buildings or infrastructure will be considered as Restricted Land.  At this stage, we do not know whether that "prescribed distance" is going to be the same as under the current law, because the "prescribed distance" is yet to be written into the regulations. The regulations have not been issued yet.

If the Bill becomes new law and I have say a bore, will things change for me if a Mining Lease is applied for?

Yes. The types of infrastructure or buildings that are now considered to be "Restricted Land" are changing.  In the new Bill, Restricted Land will mean land within the prescribed distance of a residence, a place of worship, a childcare centre, hospital or library. It will also include a school, a cemetery or burial place. An area within a prescribed distance of intensive animal feedlotting, pig keeping, poultry farming and aquaculture will become a restricted area. In other words, pretty much only buildings are now protected, and definitely not watering facilities.

 So, under the current system if a Mining Lease was to be applied for over an area where you had a dam or bore, you could withhold your consent and the mining lease would not have been granted over that area. If the bill becomes law, you will not be able to prevent the grant of a mining lease over the area around your dam or bore by withholding consent.

 For further information in relation to these issues, contact Justin Houlihan or Melanie Oliver at Rees R & Sydney Jones on 4927 6333.